D.K. Paliwal, J. - (1.)HEARD finally with the consent of the parties.
This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR at crime No. 561/2014 under Section 306/34 of IPC registered at Police Station -Ambah, District -Morena as well as the charge -sheet and entire proceedings pending before the Court below.

(2.)THE facts of the case are that Satendra Singh has informed the police that his Uncle/Lal Bahadur after taking meal sleeping. At about 04.00 AM, he was alive, at about 07.00 AM son of the informant went to the house of Lal Bahadur and thereafter informed the informant that Lal Bahadur has committed suicide and died. Merg intimation No. 62/2014 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded. During investigation it was found that prior to the incident Phoolan Devi, Dulari Devi, Manoj Singh and Rinku were harassing the deceased and also given maar -peet. On account of this Lal Bahadur committed suicide, hence the offence was registered under Section 306/34 of IPC. After due investigation charge -sheet has been filed in the Court of JMFC, Ambah. It is submitted on behalf of the applicants that prima facie no case is made out against the applicants under Section 306/34 of IPC. It is submitted that there is no evidence with regard to abatement to the deceased to commit suicide on the part of the applicants, therefore, FIR registered against the applicants deserves to be quashed. It is further submitted that material collected during investigation also does not disclose the ingredients of offence punishable under Section 306/34 of IPC, hence prosecution of the applicants tantamounts to abuse of process of law, thus it is prayed that entire proceedings also liable to be quashed. In support of his submission learned counsel for the applicants placed reliance on the following decisions : - -
"(i) Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar v. State of M.P. : 2002 SCC (Cri) 1141.

(ii) Ramesh Kumar v. Ramesh Kumar, 2002 SCC (Cri) 1088.

(iii) State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi : 2005 SCC (Cri) 415.

(iv) Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal : (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 259.

(v) Ramchandra v. State of M.P. : 2009 (2) MPLJ 147."

(3.)LEARNED Panel Lawyer appearing for the non -applicant No. 1/State has submitted that prima facie there is no sufficient material against the applicants regarding abatement to commit suicide, hence at this stage when investigating agency has submitted the charge -sheet the inherent power could not be exercised, thus prayed for dismissal of this petition.