- (1.) ORDER :-
(2.) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment dated October 26, 1993 by which the Special Judge, Bikaner has in Sessions Case No. 144/90 framed charge against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged that the order framing charge is unsustainable in law and hence liable to be quashed. On the basis of the First Information Report lodged in the police station by the brother of the deceased Sushma investigation was commenced and challan was filed against the petitioner and one Kishan Lal for offences under Sections 306 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Special Judge on appreciation of the material before him came to the conclusion that the provisions of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code cannot be attracted in relation to the petitioner Saroj as she is not relative of Kishan Lal who was husband of the deceased Sushma. The allegation that there was illicit relationship between petitioner Saroj and Kishan Lal about six years prior to the commission of suicide by the deceased Sushma. It is then stated that these persons ill-treated Sushma which amounted to cruelty as contemplated by Section 498A of the Code. Section 498A postulates cruelty to a woman by her husband or relative of the husband. The learned Judge was, therefore, right in not framing charge against the petitioner under Section 498A. The framing of charge by the learned Special Judge under Section 306, I.P.C. is in challenge in the present revision application. Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code penalise a person whoever abets the commission of suicide. In the present case it is allegation that the petitioner abeted commission of suicide by Sushma. The F.I.R. on the basis of which investigation was commenced complains of Sushma being murdered by the petitioner with Kishan Lal. During investigation it is found that the deceased Sushma had committed suicide. There will have to be, therefore, some prima facie case to show that there is some relationship between the act of suicide and the conduct of the petitioner else the charge under Section 306, I.P.C. cannot be sustained against the petitioner. Except stating that there was illicit relationship between the petitioner and Kishan Lal, husband of Sushma, there is no other averment against the petitioner. There is no averment by any body during the investigation that suicide was committed by Sushma because of the illicit relationship betwen Saroj and Kishan Lal. Factually the case as put forward by the prosecution is that she committed suicide by reasons for torture inflicted to her by Kishan Lal. In such circumstances there is no material whatsoever for sustaining the charge under Section 306, I.P.C. against the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, must succeed. It is hereby allowed. The order dated October 26, 1993 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) cases, Bikaner in Sessions Case No. 144 of 1990 framing charge against the petitioner under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, is set aside in so far as it concerns the petitioner Saroj Sharma only. The said order in so far as it frames charge against Kishan Lal is concerned, is not disturbed. ;