ORDER

1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashment of FIR No.1044/2019 registered at Police Station Khajrana, District Indore for offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC and the order dated 07.03.2022 passed by the 23rd Additional Sessions Judge, District Indore framing charge against him as aforesaid,

2. As per the prosecution, on 28.03.2019 one Raziya Bi committed suicide by hanging herself in her rented house. On her death merg was registered and investigation was commenced during the course of which statements of various witnesses were recorded. From them it transpired that Raziya Bi was earlier married but had divorced her husband on 26.03.2019. Thereafter the petitioner had been pressurizing her to marry him but she had refused. The petitioner was himself married and was having a child yet continued to harass her for marrying him. He also used to threaten her on that count. As a result of the harassment having been meted out to her by the petitioner by pressurizing her to marry him, the deceased eventually committed suicide.

3. After completion of the investigation the FIR was registered against the petitioner and eventually the charge-sheet was filed before the Court concerned after which charge has been framed against the petitioner by the trial Court as aforesaid.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. The entire allegations as leveled against the petitioner even if taken to be true at their face value do not amount to any offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC. There is no allegation against the petitioner of either instigating or abetting the deceased in any manner to commit suicide and it cannot be said that due to acts of the petitioner the deceased had no other option but to commit suicide. She had various other legal remedies available to her.

5. The allegation against the petitioner is only to the effect that he had been pressurizing the deceased to marry him and had been threatening her on that count. The same cannot in any manner be said to be abetment or instigation or even a remote cause for the deceased to commit suicide. It is hence submitted that the FIR registered against the petitioner be quashed.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/State has submitted that there is sufficient material available on record to proceed against the petitioner and it cannot be said that no offence whatsoever is made out in view of which the petition deserves to be dismissed.

7. I have heard the parties at length and have perused the record.

8. Section 107 of IPC makes it obligatory for the prosecution to show and establish the element of instigation. The Apex Court in the case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (AIR 2002 SC 1998), has opined as under :-

13. ... Even if we accept the prosecution story that the appellant did tell the deceased “to go and die”, that itself does not constitute the ingredient of “instigation”. The word “instigate” denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action or to stimulate or incite. Presence of mens rea, therefore, is the necessary concomitant of instigation. It is common knowledge that the words uttered in a quarrel or on the spur of the moment cannot be taken to be uttered with mens rea. It is in a fit of anger and emotion.”

13.

9. In the case of Sanju (supra), the accused allegedly told the deceased ‘to go and die’. Yet Apex Court opined that it does not constitute the ingredient of ‘instigation’. In the instant case, if story of prosecution is read and believed as such, it will be clear that petitioner had been pressurizing the deceased to marry him and had been threatening her on that count.

10. The ancillary question is whether his acts fall within the ambit of Se