IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH ON THE 16^th OF DECEMBER, 2025 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 810 of 2025 RAVINDRA@ RAVI AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appearance:

Shri Nilesh Dave - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Rahul Solanki – G.A. for the respondent/State.

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

Reserved on : 09.10.2025 Pronounced on : 16.12.2025 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORDER

This criminal revision under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 438 r/w Section 442 of the BNSS, 2023 is preferred being aggrieved by the order dated 24.01.2025 in ST No.01/2025 by Additional Judge, Sanawad to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mandleshwa whereby the charge under Section 306 of the IPC (presently under Section 108 of BNS, 2023) have been framed against the revision petitioners for abetment to commit the suicide by Yashwant.

2. The facts of the case in brief are that Yashwant s/o Antarsingh Mandloi resident of Indranagar, Sanawad died at 3:10 PM of 13^th May 2024. During treatment at Agrawal Hospital, Khargone Road Sanawad it was found that the cause of death was the consumption of poisonous substance identified as Celphos. He was admitted for treatment on 12.05.2024 and a Marg No.25/2024 was registered at P.S. Sanawad, District Khargone. After enquiry, Crime No.245/2024 was registered against the revisions petitioners at P.S. Sanawad, Khargone under Section 306 of the IPC and after investigation the final report was submitted.

3. The trial Court framed the charges and the same have been challenged on the ground that the essential ingredients of Section 306 of IPC is particularly lacking in the material collected during the investigation. The act of the revision petitioners cannot be equated with abetment. Counsel for the revision petitioners placed reliance on the Apex Court’s judgment in the case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar vs. State of M.P. reported in AIR 2002 Supreme Court 1998, Arnab Manoranjan Goswami vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2021) 1 SCC (Cri.) 834 and others and Priti Gupta vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2010) 7 SCC 667.

Heard.

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

5. 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 total 20 documents appended that includes dying declaration in the form of suicide note at Sr. No.10 in the list of documents as well as the statement recorded under Section 174 of the Cr.P.C. three in numbers and nine witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. The material collected in the form of statement is that present revision petitioners were residing in front of the house of the deceased at Indranagar, Sanawad, District Khargone. Revision petitioners/ accused Pinkibai is the daughter-in-law of the maternal father-in-law of the deceased and revision petitioner/ Ravi Chouhan is the brother- in-law of the Pinkibai (Devar) and the son of maternal father-in-law of the deceased. The deceased was feeling aggrieved regarding the imputations about his wife and deceased asked his wife not to talk with revision petitioners. When the wife of the deceased was at her maternal home, then deceased intimated in the evening of 12.05.2024 through phone to his wife that due to the mental harassment of imputations regarding the character of the wife, he has consumed the Celphos. The suicide note was found in the shirt’s pocket of the deceased in which the allegations of harassment were recorded by revision petitioners and the sons of Anil and contractor, but the wife denied any imputations regarding her ch