The main legal point established in the judgment is that for abetment under Section 306 of IPC, there must be proof of active instigation or intentional aid, and a scrupulous examination of facts and circumstances is essential before convicting under Section 306 IPC.

ORDER

1. The Advocates are abstaining from Court work on account of call given by the State Bar Council.

Perused the impugned order of framing charges and the documents available on record.

This criminal revision has been preferred by the petitioners under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the order dated 18.10.2022 passed by Second Sessions Judge, Vidisha, District- Vidisha (M.P.) in S.T. No.10 of 2020 by which the Sessions Judge has framed charge under Section 306 of IPC against the applicant.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of information given on 08.05.2018 Police Station Vidisha Dehat has registered a marg no.36/2018 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. in respect of death of Vinod Dangi. During course of investigation of marg the statements of Jitendra Dangi, Samavesh Dangi, Kalyan Singh Dangi, Chandrabhan Singh Raghuvanshi was recorded in which they have stated that deceased took loan from the applicant and other co-accused and despite repayment of the loan amount, petitioner and other co-accused used to harass the deceased due to which the deceased committed suicide by consuming rat killer poison. Police registered FIR bearing crime No. 352/2018 for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of IPC at police station Vidisha Dehat, District Vidisha against applicant and other co-accused. After completion of investigation and other formalities, charge-sheet has been filed and after committal, the matter has been placed before 2nd Additional Session Judge, Vidisha. The learned Session Court has framed the charge vide impugned order dated 18.10.2022 under Section 306 of IPC against applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicantcontended that prima facie on the facts and evidence as adduced by the prosecution in the case, no offence under Section 306 of the IPC is made out against the accused as there is no evidence on record to show that the applicant in any manner instigated, aided or provoked the deceased to commit suicide. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgments passed by the Apex Court in the case of Netai Dutta Vs. State of West Bengal [(2005) 2 SCC 659] and Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P. [(2002) SCC 371] and contended that the applicant has not committed any willful act or omission or intentionally aided or instigated the deceased in committing the act of suicide. There is no case that the petitioner has played any part or any role in any conspiracy which ultimately instigated or resulted in the commission of suicide by deceased.

4. Section 306 of IPC reads as under:-

Section 306. If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine

5. The 'abetment' has been defined in Section 107 of the IPC, which reads as under:-

"Section 107. A person abets the doing of a thing, who - First-Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly- Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly-Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.

Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.

6. As Section 306 of IPC makes abetment of commission of suicide punishable, therefore, for making a person liable for an offence punishable under Section 306 IPC, it is a duty of the prosecution to establish that such person has abetted the commission of suicide and for the purpose of determining the act of the accused, it is necessary to see that his act must fall in any of the 3 categories as enumerated under Section 107 of the IPC and, th