VED PRAKASH SHARMA - (1.)This petition preferred u/s. 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code , 1973 (hereinafter, for short, 'the Code') calls in question the legality, propriety and correctness of order dated 14/09/2017 passed by learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in Criminal Case No. 358/2017, whereby charge for offence u/s. 306 read section 34 of the IPC have been framed against each of the petitioners.
(2.)The petitioners have been prosecuted for offence under Section 306 of the IPC. The allegation against the petitioners is that they had assaulted deceased-Prem singh, therefore, he, feeling insulted, harassed and humiliated, committed suicide by hanging from a tree. As per prosecution, on 20/03/2017, there was quarrel between deceased-Prem Singh on one side and petitioners-Virendra Singh, Praveen Singh, Narendra Singh and Dilip Singh on the other side. Allegedly, deceased Prem Singh was opposing the construction of drain which was being constructed pursuant to a resolution passed by the Gram- Panchayat. The further allegation is that because all these petitioners assaulted the deceased by kicks and fists openly, therefore, he, feeling harassed and humiliated, committed suicide on 31/03/2017 by hanging himself on a tree.
(3.)It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations made by the deceased in the suicide-note, said to have been left by him, even if accepted in their entirety, do not make out a case u/s. 306 read with Section 107 of the IPC. It is submitted that to constitute abetment within the meaning of Section 107 read with Section 306 of the IPC, there should be instigation, provocation, incitement, suggestion, persuasion or goading to commit suicide and that, the accused must have intended that the deceased commits suicide. Reliance in this regard has been placed on Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 2002 S.C. 1998 and Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhatisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618. The contention is that even if all the allegations are accepted in their entirety, still the same does not make out a case u/s. 306 read with Section 107 of the IPC.