IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA th ON THE 9 OF FEBRUARY, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5736 of 2024 BETWEEN:-

SATISH SAHU S/O SHRI ROOP NARAYAN SAHU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O H.NO.

9/9 ASHOK NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI YOGENDRA SINGH JATWA - ADVOCATE)

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION NANAKHEDA THANA DISTT. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. CHAGANLAL YADAV S/O RAM CHANDRA YADAV, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 80, SHANTI NAGAR POLICE STATION NANAKHEDA DIST. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY MRS. VINITA DWIVEDI - PANEL LAWYER)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

Heard.

This petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C has been filed for quashment of FIR No.645/2022, registered at Police Station Nanakheda, District Ujjain for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 of the IPC and all subsequent proceedings.

2 . As per the prosecution, on 05.09.2022, deceased Amar Yadav Signature Not Verified Signed by: JYOTI committed suicide by consuming a poisonous substance. On his death merg was registered and investigation was commenced during the course of which statements of various witnesses were recorded from which it transpired that the deceased had taken certain sums on loan from different persons including the present petitioner, who had been exercising pressure upon him for return of the same. He used to call him and also used to visit his house demanding repayment of his amount. The deceased did not narrate about the incident to anyone but used to remain harassed on account of the acts of the accused. Eventually due to the harassment having been meted out to him by the accused including the present petitioner, the deceased committed suicide. On recording of the statements, FIR has been registered against the accused including the petitioner for the aforesaid offences and upon completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the Court concerned.

3 . 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 his face value do not amount to an offence punishable under Section 306/34 of the IPC. There are no allegations against the petitioner of instigating or abetting the deceased in any manner to commit suicide and it cannot be said that due to act of the petitioner, the deceased had no other option but to commit suicide. He had various other legal remedies available to him. The act alleged against the petitioner is only to the effect that he was demanding repayment from the deceased of the amount which had been lent by him to him. 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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: JYOTI quashed.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/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.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have perused the record.

6. Section 107 of the IPC makes it obligatory for the prosecution to show and establish the elements of instigation. The Apex Court in the case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Senger V/s. State of M.P., 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 concomi