Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ram Naresh And Anr. vs State Of M.P. And Ors. on 25 January, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2002(2)MPHT183
ORDER S.L. Kochar, J.
1. This revision has been filed by the applicants against the order dated 7-12-2001 passed by Special Judge, Dewas in S.T. No. 58/2001 framing charge for the offence under Section 306 framing charge against the applicants for the offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 of IPC. The Police Station, Tonk Khurd, Distt. Dewas has filed charge-sheet against the applicants and other accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34, IPC.
2. The prosecution case in short was that the deceased Narayan s/o Babulal Manguolia had taken loan from the applicants and non-applicant Nos. 2 and 3. These loans were raised by him at different point of time from the accused persons. Thereafter he failed to repay the same as per the terms and conditions because of which the applicants were demanding the said loan with interest and torturing the deceased Narayan. It is further alleged by the prosecution that the applicants Ram Naresh and Devendra were visiting his house again and again and degraded him by demanding money with interest. All the accused persons were delivering threat to him for payment of money and if the same will not be paid he will have to vacate the house. The applicants had also threatened for throwing the assets and house belongings on the road. Because of persistent demand by the applicants and accused persons one day under frustration the deceased Narayan committed suicide.
3. The Trial Court on the aforesaid facts framed charges against the applicants under Section 306 read with Section 34, IPC. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that even if the complete prosecution case is accepted as it is, there are no elements present for making out the prima facie case worth punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34, IPC because the applicants were demanding their money and by that day did not intend to abet for commission of suicide of the deceased Narayan because he was not able to pay loan and because of that he might have committed suicide that may be the reason for suicide but the same reason cannot be construed as abetment to commit suicide. He further submits that the abetment is defined under Section 107, IPC and none of the ingredients are present in the complete charge-sheet therefore the trial is none but an abuse of process of Court of law, hence in the interest of justice, this Court may set aside the order of framing charge and quash the whole proceedings.
4. Learned Dy. A.G. Mr. Desai has also gone through the complete challan as well as impugned order and unable to substantiate by pointing out such material which may make out prima facie case worth punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34, IPC.
5. In a similarly situated fact, this Court in a case of Vedprakash Tarachand Bhaiji v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1995 MPLJ 458) held as under:--
The accused persons were charge-sheeted under Section 306 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on the basis of a suicide note left by the deceased in which he had blamed all the five accused and held them responsible for his (suicidal) death. However, it was found that none of the accused had goaded or urged forward, provoked, incited or urged or encouraged the deceased to commit suicide. They merely goaded him to refund/repay the amount of loan advanced by them to him. They never intended that the deceased should commit suicide. Moreover, the deceased could have lodged a report against accused who had allegedly tortured him and threatened him to kill. May be, as it sometimes happens, the police officials might have declined to record the report. In that case, he could have moved higher officials. But, instead of taking this legal and legitimate action, the deceased adopted an escapist course of committing suicide in order to take revenge from his alleged tormentors. No case for alleged commission of the offence was made out against the accused persons.
Reference of a case Mahaveer Singh and Ors. v. State of M.P. (1987 JLJ 645) can also be made in this regard.
6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and legal position, this Court is inclined to accept the prayer of the applicants and quash the proceedings against the applicants for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34, IPC pending before the Special Judge, Dewas. In the result the revision is allowed and order dated 7-12-2001 is also set aside regarding framing of charges.