For a conviction under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or aiding the deceased to commit suicide, which was absent in this case.

ORDER

The instant criminal petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C .,), has been filed by the petitioner/A1, seeking quashment of the proceedings against him in Crime No.242 of 2020 of I Town Police Station, Srikalahasti, Tirupathi Urban District.

2. The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:-

(i) De facto complainant is respondent No.2 herein. The marriage of the de facto complainant was performed about 18 years ago with Pallakuru Venkata Ramana, S/o Venkata Subbalah, aged 41 years. Her husband was engaged in their caste profession, i.e., beating of drums. They have two children, namely, P. Supraja (17 years) and P. Divya (16 years), are studying. Her husband had taken a loan from outsiders for their family expenses but was unable to repay it. He also had a habit of drinking. For three months prior to the date of incident, due to the COVID-19 lockdown, he had no work and no money to meet family expenses, which further prevented him from repaying his debts. As a result, he often fell into psychological depression.

(ii) While the situation stood thus, on 29.05.2020, at about 07:00 AM, the de facto complainant found her husband, P. Venkata Ramana, dead, having hanged himself with his dothi from a ceiling hook in their hall. He was indebted to several persons and unable to look after the welfare of the de facto complainant and their children. Vexed with his life, he committed suicide using his dothi.

(iii) Basing on the complaint, a case in Crime No.242 of 2020 for the offence u/s 174 Cr.P.C . was registered initially. After completion of cremation of the body of the deceased, the de facto complainant verified the mobile belongs to her husband and found a selfie video, which was recorded by her husband before committing suicide and on watching the said video, she found that her husband committed suicide due to the harassment of money lenders i.e., A1 and others. Basing on which, the Police altered the Section of law from174 Cr.P.C to Section 306 r/w 34 IPC .

3. Heard Sri Rama Krishna Akurathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is falsely implicated in the present case and has nothing to do with the alleged offences. There was nothing on record which would constitute the commission of an offence under Section 306 IPC as the ingredients of Section 107 IPC are completely lacking. He further submits that for an offence under Section 306 IPC the prosecution should have, at the very least established that the accused had an intention to aid, instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide. Without a positive act on the part of the accused in aiding, instigating or abetting the deceased to commit suicide, the question of the commission of the offence did not arise. Hence, he prayed for quashment.

5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondents submits that there are specific allegations made against the petitioners. The truth or otherwise of the allegations will be revealed during the course of the trial. There are no grounds to quash the proceedings against the petitioners at this stage. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. Having heard both sides, now the point that would emerge for determination is:

Whether there are any justifiable grounds for quashing of the proceedings against the petitioner/A1 in Crime No.242 of 2020 of I Town Police Station, Srikalahasthi, for the offence under Section 306 r/w 34 of the IPC ?

7. A bare perusal of Section 482 of Cr.P.C . makes it clear that the Code envisages that inherent powers of the High Court are not limited or affected so as to make orders as may be necessary; (i) to give effect to any order under the Code or, (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or, otherwise (iii) to secure ends of justice. A Court while sitting in Section 482 jurisdiction is not functioning as a court o