To establish abetment of suicide under IPC Section 306, there must be clear intent or instigation from the accused leading to the victim's suicide, which was not met in this case.

ORDER:

N. TUKARAMJI, J.

Heard Mr. K. Venumadhav, learned counsel for petitioner/accused and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

2. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘CrPC’) for quashment of charge sheet in Sessions Case No.70 of 2020 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge, Bhongir.

3. The petitioner is arrayed as an accused for the offence under Section 306 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE ,1860 (for short, ‘IPC’).

4. The relevant facts in brief are that on 15.05.2019 one Enugu Linga Reddy/de facto complainant lodged police report stating that his son/Enugu Mahender Reddy/deceased in June, 2016 had purchased Ashok Leyland Borewell vehicle bearing Registration No.TS-05-EP-1377 in partnership with his son-in-law/accused. However, the vehicle was registered in the name of his son-in-law. Later, on 07.07.2018 the partners had entered into an agreement and accordingly his son/deceased paid the entire monthly instalments till 16.04.2019. As per the agreement his son-in- law/accused should hand over the borewell vehicle along with no objection certificate (NOC). However, with an ill intention without abiding the terms of the agreement on 13.05.2019 called his son/deceased to the house of one Shyamala Murali Manohar Reddy and there his son-in-law/accused snatched away the original agreement papers and threatened that his son/deceased does not have any right over that vehicle. Again on 14.05.2019 his son-in-law/accused filed complaint against himself/de facto complaionant,, his wife, his son/deceased, his daughter and her husband and threatened them that by foisting case he will send them all to jail and see that his son/deceased does not get married. Keeping this in mind, in the morning of 15.05.2019 Whereafter, his son’s friends viz. Repaka Suresh, Vallamdas Harikishan and Boddupally Purushotham called his son and made effort to infuse courage, his son sent them away by informing that he will come. Thereafter all of them left to attend employment generation works and in their absence feeling afraid of the threats of his brother-in- law/accused, his son/deceased hanged himself to the beam. On their return at about 11.45 a.m. finding his son’s death, on their hue and cry, the neighbours gathered, thereafter by climbing over the wall behind their house, entered and found his son died. Therefore, on his son-in-law/accused’s harassment his son/deceased felt threatened and humiliated committed suicide. Thus his son-in-law/accused caused his son’s death and requested to take necessary action against him.

5. Upon the report, the police registered a case in Crime No.81 of 2019 for the offence under Section 306 IPC and after the investigation laid the charge sheet confirming the accusation under Section 306 IPC.

PLEADINGS OF THE PETITIONER

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the entire allegations in the complaint as well as the statements of witnesses and the materials collected in the investigation are not making out any prima facie case reflecting commission of offence under Section 306 IPC. He pleads that the purchase of borewell vehicle in financial transactions and the alleged threats in that course by the petitioner said to have caused the incident. But there is no allegation as to any act of instigation or aiding for commissi