TOPAN DAS BHAGYADEV Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been brought being aggrieved by the order of framing charge dated 06.02.2020, passed in S.T. No. 107 of 2019, by the Second Additional Judge to the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the impugned order is erroneous and perverse. The applicant has played no role in the commission of suicide by the deceased Vinay Nebhani. The applicant has not instigated, neither conspired nor aided in that commission of suicide by the deceased. The deceased committed suicide on 20.03.2015. The FIR has been lodged after huge delay on 05.08.2018. The deceased was indebted and making demand of debt is not an act of abetment. Only for the reason that name of the applicant is mentioned in the suicide note of the deceased by itself is not an evidence to show that this applicant has abetted the deceased for commission of suicide. Whole material in the charge-sheet does not make out a case of abetment as defined under Section 107 of I.P.C.

(3.) Reliance has been placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in case of State of West Bengal Vs. Orilal jaiswal and another, reported in (1994) 1 SCC 73, Gangula Mohan Reddy Vs. State of A.P., reported in (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 917, in case of Netai Dutta Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in (2005) 2 SCC 659, in V. Venkataraman Vs. State, reported in 2015 SCC OnLine Mad. 13892. It is further submitted that co-accused persons namely Manoj Rajput and Jasbir Singh Bedi have been discharged by this Court by order dated 12.03.2020, passed in Cr.R. No.330 of 2020 and Cr.R. No. 384 of 2020. The case of the applicant is also similar. Hence, it is prayed that this revision petition be allowed.