SHAIKH NASREEN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants apprehending arrest in CR No.160 of 2020 registered with Police Station, Dharmabad, Dist. Nanded, for committing offence punishable under sections 306 and 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, have preferred this application, seeking pre-arrest bail, on the ground set out in detail in the application.

(2.) Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and learned APP for the respondent/State. Perused the FIR and the papers of investigation.

(3.) In brief, it is contention of the learned Counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and falsely implicated in the case at the behest of the informant. By referring to allegations made in the FIR, learned Counsel submits that, if the allegations made in the FIR are accepted in its entirety and presumed to be true and correct, still it make out no case to attract offence under section 306 of the IPC. It is submitted that in order to attract offence under section 306 of the IPC, there must be an act of abetment as defined under section 107 of the IPC. The person who said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. The act of abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding that person in doing of a thing. It is further submitted that suicide committed by deceased on account of long standing matrimonial discord with the wife itself not sufficient to attract the commission of offence under section 306 of the IPC. The act of mental or physical harassment without any intention to drive the deceased to commit suicide not sufficient to attract the offence under section 306 of IPC against the applicants.