Netai Dutta vs State Of West Bengal on 28 February, 2005
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after death of deceased
Rahul Merg was enquired for ten days in which statements of the witnesses
were also recorded, but no witness alleged that petitioner has abetted the
deceased to commit suicide. Subsequently, after two and half months statement
of Nawal Kishore was recorded, in which he alleged that during Panchayat
petitioner along with other accused put a condition of transferring the ownership
of ancestral house of the deceased in the name of Shivani for compromising the
matter. It is submitted that on these allegations, prima facie no offence under
Section 306 of the IPC is made out against the petitioner. Petitioner being
Mausa of the deceased during Panchayat only supported the demand of family
members of the deceased, that does not mean that petitioner has instigated the
Signature Not Verified
deceased to commit suicide. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon
Signed by: MADHU
SOODAN PRASAD
Signing time: 12-04-2023
11:06:56 AM
the judgments passed by the Apex Court in the case of Netai Dutta Vs. State
4
of West Bengal [(2005) 2 SCC 659] and Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar
Vs. State of M.P. [(2002) 5 SCC 371] and contended that the petitioner has
not committed any willful act or omission or intentionally aided or instigated the
deceased in committing the act of suicide. There is no case that the petitioner
has played any part or any role in any conspiracy which ultimately instigated or
resulted in the commission of suicide by deceased.