ORDER
B.M. Gupta, J.
1. This revision has been preferred by the petitioners impugning the order dated 9-2-2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ganjbadosa, Dist. Vidisha, in Sessions Trial No. 208/2004, by which the learned Judge has ordered to frame the charge against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.
2. Admittedly, the deceased-Revishankar S/o. Bharat Singh Kurmi committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance on 29-6-2004. His dying declaration was recorded. The relevant part of the statement is as under;
(Vernacular matter omitted....Ed.)
3. On perusal of the statements of Bharat Singh and Arvind Patel who are the father and brother of the deceased, it appears that one letter was found in the pocket of the deceased which was addressed to the in-charge Police Station, Teonda. Despite direction and awaiting for a period of more than one year, that letter could not be produced by the State nor it has been informed as to whether the letter is available with the police or not. It can be taken as an example, as how the concerning State authorities are responsible towards the highest Court of the State. It is for the State also to consider.
4. On perusal of the statements of the aforementioned two witnesses, it also appears that there was a dispute between the family members of the deceased at one side and with the family of the petitioner on the other side. One case was pending in the Court also. After consuming the poisonous substance, the deceased informed these two witnesses, that being afraid of the petitioners and on account of their terror-he has opted to die by committing suicide. Thus, it appears that as per the dying declaration and the statements of these two witnesses, it appears that the deceased committed suicide on the ground that he was afraid of the act of the petitioners and he preferred to commit suicide than being killed by their hands.
5. On the aforementioned facts whether the offence charged is made out or not, is to be considered. The definition of Section 306 of IPC is as under:
306. Abetment of suicide.--If any per son commits suicide, whoever, abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
If the suicide is committed on the abetment of a culprit then his act will be punishable under this provision. Thus, the abetment is the material ingredient for this offence. Abetment has been defined under Section 107 of IPC, which goes as under:
107. Abetment of a thing.--A person abets the doing of a thing, who-
First.--Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly.--Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or
Thirdly.--Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1.--A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing.
Example: A, a public officer, is authorized by a warrant from a Court of Justice to apprehend Z, B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z, wilfully represent to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the apprehension of C.
Explanation 2.--Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilities the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.
Thus, it is very clear that in order to make out the offence of abetment of suicide, the necessary requirement is that the culprit has either instigated the victim to commit suicide or has engaged himself in conspiracy with others, for doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy and in order of doing that thing, or has intentionally aided, by any act or illegal omission in commission of suicide. Instigation denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadmissable action or to stimulate or incite. Presence of mens rea is necessary concomitant for investigation.
6. Further, it may be well to remember that the act done to facilitate the commission of suicide should be closely proximate in time to the time of incident. The acts done at a distant time with no close, nearness or proximity to the time of a suicide will obviously have to be ruled out, as acts facilitating and accelerating the commission of suicide.
7. It appears appropriate to highlight a few examples on each ingredient of the aforementioned definition of abetment which are: (1) The afore-quoted illustration in the definition of abetment can very well illustrate the abetment by 'instigation'. (2) In a case, a lady was assaulted, molested and then raped by one constable in a room while her husband was kept detained in another room by the other constable who turned the deaf ear to the cries of the lady. It was held by the Apex Court that the act. of another constable comes under the definition of 'abetment' as he 'facilitated' the crime because he failed to react on hearing of the shrieks of the hapless lady, (3) In a terrorist attack on Parliament accused was party to conspiracy as he had taken active part in series of steps taken to pursue objective of conspiracy. It has been held by the Apex Court that it was abetment by 'conspiracy'. (4) In case, a number of persons forming a procession followed a widow to funeral pyre to aid her committing 'sati'. The procession barricaded the police party who went to restrain the lady and rescue her and in the process the police party was rendered helpless. The lady eventually burnt herself to death on the funeral pyre of her husband. The persons forming the procession were held guilty of abetting suicide the lady to become 'sati' as they intentionally aided in committing offence by her.
8. Nothing that sort of act can be presumed by the aforementioned act of the petitioners. It also does not appear as to what threat was given and at what time. Thus, the act alleged against the petitioners will no amount to abetment for committing suicide by deceased.
9. In view of this, the revision deserves to be allowed. Consequently, the revision is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The petitioners are discharged from the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.