SHAIKH NASREEN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The applicants apprehending arrest in CR No.160 of 2020 registered with Police Station, Dharmabad, Dist.
Nanded, for committing offence punishable under sections
306 and 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, have preferred this application, seeking pre-arrest
bail, on the ground set out in detail in the application.
(2.) Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and learned APP for the respondent/State. Perused the FIR
and the papers of investigation.
(3.) In brief, it is contention of the learned Counsel for the applicants that the applicants are
innocent and falsely implicated in the case at the behest
of the informant. By referring to allegations made in
the FIR, learned Counsel submits that, if the allegations
made in the FIR are accepted in its entirety and presumed
to be true and correct, still it make out no case to
attract offence under section 306 of the IPC. It is
submitted that in order to attract offence under section
306 of the IPC, there must be an act of abetment as defined under section 107 of the IPC. The person who
said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have
played an active role by an act of instigation or by
doing certain act to facilitate the commission of
suicide. The act of abetment involves a mental process
of instigating a person or intentionally aiding that
person in doing of a thing. It is further submitted that
suicide committed by deceased on account of long standing
matrimonial discord with the wife itself not sufficient
to attract the commission of offence under section 306 of
the IPC. The act of mental or physical harassment
without any intention to drive the deceased to commit
suicide not sufficient to attract the offence under
section 306 of IPC against the applicants.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.