Judgment:
ORDER
S.S. Dwivedi, J.
1. Applicant has preferred this revision petition under Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code feeling aggrieved by the impugned order dated 17-7-2006 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions. Judge, Ratlam in Session trial No. 17/2006 whereby learned trial Court has ordered for framing of the charge under Sections 306 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code against the applicant/accused.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant/accused is the wife of one Narendra Chatar. They were living together at Ratlam. It is alleged that the applicant/ accused demanded money repeatedly from her husband for her expenses and also harassing him by the excessive demand. Due to this treatment, husband of the applicant/ accused Narendra Chatar had consumed some poisonous substance and committed suicide on 8-5-2005. A morgue report has been registered by the police and postmortem has been performed on the dead body of the deceased Narendra Chatar. On enquiry it has been found that due to cruel treatment and harassment by the applicant/ accused/wife of the deceased, the deceased had committed suicide and a case under Section 306, IPC has been registered against the applicant. She has been arrested and after due investigation, charge-sheet has been filed under Section 306, IPC. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the applicant has preferred this revision.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Government Advocate for the State and perused the impugned order as well as the documents filed with the charge-sheet.
4. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the prosecution has not collected any cogent evidence, on which basis, this can be inferred that by her act or omission the applicant being the wife of the deceased has ever instigated the deceased for the commission of suicide and thus, learned trial Court has committed error by the aforesaid order for framing of the charge under Section 306, IPC against the applicant, in view of that, prayed for setting aside of the impugned order and for discharge of the applicant/accused.
5. Learned Government Advocate supported the impugned order and submits that due to cruel treatment and harassment by the applicant/accused to her husband, Narendra Chatar husband committed suicide, therefore, prima facie charge under Section 306, IPC is clearly made out against the applicant and learned trial Court has rightly ordered for framing of the aforesaid charge against the applicant and no substantial grounds are available for any interference in the impugned order, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the revision petition.
6. On consideration of the rival contentions made by the learned Counsel for the parties, it is a peculiar case wherein husband committed suicide due to harassment of his wife. Normally maximum percentage of case came up before the Court for commission of suicide by wife on the instigation or harassment on behalf of the husband or in-laws. In this peculiar case, whatever evidence is collected by the prosecution is that being the wife of the deceased Narendra Chatar, applicant/accused was repeatedly demanding money for expenses and proved to be expensive wife and also threatened the deceased for lodging false report against him for the harassment. Living with an expensive wife may be a reason for commission of the suicide by the husband Narendra Chatar, but this itself cannot be the basis for inference of 'instigation' which is necessary requirement for the charge under Section 306, IPC. For the charge under Section 306, IPC, necessary ingredient is 'instigation' to commit suicide by the accused persons on which basis, deceased has committed suicide. 'Instigation' has been defined under Section 107, IPC which is 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.
7. On perusal of the aforesaid definition of 'instigation' we will have to examine the evidence on' record as to whether by any act or omission instigation on behalf of the applicant/accused is prima facie proved or not. On perusal of the entire statement recorded by the Police, only allegation against the applicant/accused is that she being a very expensive attitude, repeatedly, demanding money from her husband and due to which, deceased Narendra Chatar committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance 'SULFOS'. There is no clear allegation against the applicant that she ever instigated the deceased for commission of the suicide. Thus, the only fact apparent on the basis of this statement that due to frustration or not able to live with wife, who is such a habits of expenses and repeatedly demanding money from him, the deceased may commit suicide, who by this Act gave instigation for commission of the suicide on behalf of the applicant/accused, cannot be inferred.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts and the evidence on record, in my considered opinion, being an expensive wife, this act of the applicant/accused herself cannot come within the purview of the provisions of Section 107, IPC for instigation of commission of suicide.]
9. In view of the overall facts of the case, in my considered opinion, no substantial evidence is-available for framing of the charge under Section 306, IPC against the applicant, therefore, the impugned order passed by the trial Court for framing of the aforesaid charge appears to be erroneous and liable to be set aside.
10. Resultantly, this revision petition preferred by the applicant is allowed. The impugned order passed by the trial Court is set aside and the applicant/accused is discharged from the charge of Sections 306 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.