To establish abetment under IPC, there must be evidence of intention and direct act by the accused leading to suicide; mere allegations without substantiated claims are insufficient.

ORDER :

Maninder S. Bhatti, J.

Through this Criminal Revision under Section 397 /401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 10.1.2023 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Pipariya, District Hoshangabad in Sessions Trial No. 33/2022 by which charges have been framed against the petitioner.

2. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is being prosecuted for the offence which according to prosecution have been committed by the present applicant under Section 305 of INDIAN PENAL CODE . It is contended by the counsel that in the present case a Merg Intimation was received by the Police on 10.8.2021 at around 5:25 p.m. that the deceased had consumed poison on 29.7.2021 and ultimately died in hospital. In the said Merg Intimation it was mentioned that no postmortem was done. Thereafter statement of the relatives of the deceased were recorded on 14.8.2021 and 15.8.2021 and for the first time the relatives of the deceased levelled allegations against the applicant that as the applicant was pressurizing the deceased to enter into wedlock, the deceased under stress committed suicide and thus, the First Information Report was lodged against the petitioner on 14.8.2021.

3. It is contended by the counsel that the applicant has been falsely implicated. There is no whisper in the Merg Intimation regarding any kind of undue pressure by the applicant. There are no allegation of any instigation at the behest of the present applicant. The applicant never instigated the deceased to commit suicide. It is contended by the counsel that there are no allegations that the applicant was torturing or was mounting any undue pressure. It is contended by the counsel that even if the allegations so levelled by all the witnesses are taken into consideration on their face value, the same was not a case of enticement or instigation and thus no case under Section 305 I.P.C could have been registered against the applicant nor the charge under the aforesaid Section could have been framed and submits that the impugned order of framing of charge be set aside.

4. Counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that there are direct allegations against the applicant. He was guilty of instigating the deceased as a result of which the deceased committed suicide and, therefore, in such circumstances, no case for interference is made out.

5. Heard submissions and perused the record.

6. In the present case the order of framing of charge is being assailed by the applicant on the ground that the Merg Intimation dated 10.8.2021 is totally silent as regards allegation of instigation or abetment to commit suicide against the present applicant and it is the ground that the deceased had consumed poison on 7.7.2021. She remained in the hospital and ultimately died on 29.7.2021. From 7.7.2021 till lodging of the First Information Report on 14.8.2021 no effort was made by the family members to implicate the applicant and accordingly the challenge is being made to the proceedings and ensued order of framing of charges. A perusal of the record reflects that the statement of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Uncle of the deceased Rakesh has stated in his statement that applicant used to stop the deceased while she used to go to school and used to pressurize her to enter into wedlock. It is also stated by him that on 7.7.2021 also the applicant stopped the deceased when she was going to Market and, therefore, the deceased consumed poison in the same evening and died. Identical statements are there of mother and father and other relatives of the deceased. A perusal of the entire statements r