1. Petitioner have filed this revision against the order dated 20.11.2006, passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, in Sessions Trial No. 3612006, framing the charge under section 306 of Indian Penal Code against him.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that prima-facie on the facts and evidence as adduced by the prosecution in the case, no offence under section 306 of Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioners, as there is absolutely no evidence to infer that petitioners in any manner instigated, aided or provoked the deceased to commit suicide. Merely because the petitioners had grabbed the money of deceased and had assaulted him, it cannot be said that they abetted the deceased to commit suicide. Since no ingredient of abetment is borne out from the facts of the prosecution case, learned trial Court committed error in framing charge under section 306 of Indian Penal Code against the petitioners.

3. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the deceased had committed suicide because his money had been held up by the accused Babbi and when he demanded his money back, he was assaulted, due to which, he committed suicide by drowning in the well. Since the deceased committed suicide due to the conduct of the petitioners, the trial Court did not commit any error in framing charge under section 306 of Indian Penal Code.

4. In short, the facts of the case are that accused Babbi @ Jitendra Vishwakarma and the deceased Godan had taken a joint loan of Rs. 10,000/- from the State Bank. Deceased had sold a portion of his house and some crop for Rs. 40,000/-. All of this had been kept by accused Babbi. When deceased demanded the said money, it was not given back to him. It is said that in the night of 10.4.2005 when deceased went to the house of Babbi Vishwakarma for demanding money, he did not pay it to him and instead Babbi, Madanlal, Shailendra, Umesh and Satish assaulted him. This incident was witnessed by his son Sonu.

5. On perusal of the statement of Sonu, Shivpati Bai (wife), Hemraj (cousin), Ram Bharose, Bhagwati and Yashoda, it is seen that all of the aforesaid witnesses stated before the police that Babbi Vishwakarma had borrowed a loan for Rs. 10,000/- on the land of deceased. That amount was kept by Babby. Deceased had sold a portion of his house for Rs.40,000/ and had also collected some money by selling his crop and all that money was kept with Babbi. Babbi had assured the deceased that he would get opened a shop of grocery for his son, but Babby did not return the said money and when deceased demanded the same, he abused and assaulted him. In the night of 10.4.2005 when deceased had gone to the house of Babbi, all the accused persons abused and assaulted him. Deceased, after informing to his family members that he was going to lodge the report, went somewhere and never returned back. On 13.4.2005, his dead body was found in a well.

6. On report being lodged with the police, a case under section 306 of Indian Penal Code was registered against the petitioners.

7. On postmortem examination of the dead body, the death of deceased was found due to asphyxia due to drowning.

8. The question in the present case is as to whether considering and accepting the entire material available on record as absolutely correct and true, a prima-facie case for alleged commission of an offence punishable under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the accused-petitioners.

9. For making out an offence under section 306 of Indian Penal Code, one essential and requisite ingredient is 'abetment' by the accused to deceased to commit suicide. Section 306 of Indian Penal Code reads as under:

"306. Abetment of suicide. -- 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.

10. As per definition given in