1. Applicants have filed this revision against the order dated 16.9.2006, passed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai, in Sessions Trial No. 414/ 2005, framing the charge against the applicants u/s. 306/34 of IPC.

2. In short, the prosecution case is that on 18.7.2005, when Vijay Saraf (deceased) was in Court premises at Bina, applicants forcibly took him on a motorcycle, assaulted him and made him to sign some papers. Being harassed and frustrated, on 19.7.2005, Vijay consumed poison (Sulphas) and committed suicide. According to postmortem examination report, death was caused by cardio-respiratory failure, as a result of suspected poisoning. On receiving the report about his death, police registered a murg and enquired into the matter. On enquiry, it was found that after doing his MBA, deceased entered into partnership with Manish Shrivastava and obtained dealership of Indo-Parma Tractor. Both of them borrowed huge amount of money, but subsequently they incurred losses. According to prosecution, Manish Shrivastava was liable to make good all the losses, but he did not do so. It is said that the applicants had also advanced money to them, but when deceased did not repay their money, they harassed and intimidated him. On 21.5.2005 applicants assaulted Vma Shanker, the younger brother of the deceased, and again on 18.7.2005, when the deceased had gone to the Court, he was forcibly taken away by them and was assaulted and compelled to sign some papers. Subsequently Vijay had been freed by them and was left by the applicants in the Court. On 19.7.2005, when he was at his house, after taking meals, he went to a temple and consumed poison. This fact was intimated to his father by the priest of the temple. He was sent for the treatment, but despite efforts, he could not be saved.

3. During investigation, police recorded the statements of Madan Saraf, Savitribai, Vmashanker and Pankaj, who happened to be the parents, brother and friend of deceased. Madan Saraf in his statement reiterated that the deceased had incurred loss in the business, therefore, the partnership between him and Manish Shrivastava was dissolved in August 2004. Though Manish Shrivastava had to make good all the liabilities, but he failed to do so and the persons who had advanced money, started pressurizing the deceased for the payments. According to him, the deceased informed him that on 18.7.2005 Pramod Jain and Rajeev Shrivastava had forcibly taken him on a motorcycle and compelled him to sign some papers and had threatened him that the money shall be recovered from his father. On 19.7.2005, Vijay consumed poison in a temple. Similar type of statements were given by Savitribai and Vma Shanker. Witnesses Anil and Ashok disclosed that they had seen the applicants taking deceased on a motorcycle. Police also seized some letters, purporting to be written and signed by the deceased, wherein number of persons had been named alleging that they deceived him and misappropriated his money. It is important to note that the present case has been registered only against the two applicants. In the suicidal note, which is said to have been seized from the pocket of the deceased, it has been mentioned that Manish Shrivastava (not accused) had misappropriated Rs. 10 lacs. Satish Shrivastava, Raghvendra, Om Prakash Shrivastava and Asha Shrivastava had embroiled him in misdeeds. They made him to borrow money from people and later on under a conspiracy clamped the liability on him.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that even on accepting all the facts, alleged by the prosecution, as they are, no offence u1s. 306 of IPC is made out, as no ingredient of the offence u1s. 107 of IPC are present, which are required for constituting the offence of abetment to commit suicide. According to him, in the absence of material on record, constituting the ingredients of aforesaid offences, no charge u/s. 306 of IPC could be framed against the applicants.

5. The