IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH ON THE 15^th OF DECEMBER, 2025 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3291 of 2025 MANKUWAR BAI AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appearance:

Shri Vishal Sharma - Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Rajesh Joshi – G.A. for the respondent/State.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reserved on : 11.11.2025 Pronounced on : 15.12.2025 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORDER

This criminal revision under Section 438(1) r/w Section 442 of the BNSS, 2023 is preferred being aggrieved by the order dated 02.07.2025 in ST No.34/2024 by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Shujalpur, District: Shajapur, whereby the charge under Section 306 r/w Section 34 of the IPC has been framed against the revision petitioners.

2. The facts in brief are that the Marg No.22/2024 was registered at P.S. Shujalpur Mandi regarding the death of Shankarlal Parmar by hanging at 12:00 PM on 03.05.2024. After enquiry, Crime No.297/2024 was registered at P.S. Shujalpur Mandi against the revision petitioners under Section 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC on

26.07.2025. After investigation, a final report was submitted and vide impugned order, the charges were framed.

3. Challenging the framing of charges this revision petition has been preferred on the ground that the revision petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. If the prosecution case is taken as gospel of truth, there is no allegation against the revision petitioners that the alleged overt act have been committed by the revision petitioners. The alleged suicide note seized by police has not indicated any abetment to commit the suicide. Heard.

5. Counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the criminal appeal by submitting that the impugned order does not require any interference.

6. Perused the final report submitted under section 173 (2) of the Cr.P.C., 1973 (presently section 193 of B.N.S.S., 2023) and the material collected with case diary. The list of documents appended with the final report includes a 32 documents in which the suicide note as mentioned at Sr. No.15 which is alleged to be written by the deceased and four statements were recorded during the Marg enquiry and eight statements were recorded during the investigation. All the eight witnesses namely Mahesh Parmar, Vishnu Parmar, Hemant Parmar, Krishnabai (wife of deceased), Elam Singh, Manohar Singh, Mukesh Parmar and Balram.

7. The basis of framing the charges against the revision petitioners based on dying declaration of the deceased in the form of suicide note as well as the statement of the witnesses is to the effect that prior to 1^1/2 months prior to the death of Shankarlal Parmar revision petitioners digging the pitch in front of the house of the deceased and erected a vire fencing and the drainage of the water was chocked by putting the soil in front of the house of Shankarlal. Shankarlal and his family members were feeling inconvenient in their access to the house, due to this there was a dispute between both the families and the matter could not be solved in the Village Panchayat.

8. The deceased Shankarlal was working as AG-III in the office of Block Education Officer, Shujalpur and he committed the suicide with a request to Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsildar and Education Minister of M.P. to make arrangement for supply of drinking water in the house so that his children can live in the house. The date on the letter was mentioned as 30.04.2024.

9. The Apex Court in the case of Mahendra Awase vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh; 2025 INSC 76, has held in para 11 to 20 which is being reproduced as below:-

"11. Section 306 of the IPC reads as under:-

“306. Abetment of suicide. If any person commits suicide, whoever