VARSHA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has preferred this revision petition under Section 397 / 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ' Cr.P.C .') against order dated 19/08/2019 passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam in S.T. No. 209/2014, whereby charge for commission of offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC has been framed against the applicant.

(2.) Briefly stated facts of the case are that on 08/12/2013, one Manish Verma committed suicide and his dead body was found lying on the railway track. After receiving the information, regarding the unnatural death of the deceased, police registered Merg intimation under Section 174 of the Cr.P.C. and the dead body of the deceased was sent for postmortem. During the merg enquiry, it was found that co-accused-Sudeep was having illicit relationship with the applicant (the wife of deceased), due to which a quarrel was taken place between the deceased and the applicant, then he went away to the railway track and committed suicide by jumping before the running train. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed. Trial Court after appreciating the material available on record, vide order dated 19/08/2019 framed the charge for commission of offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC against the applicant.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is no material available in the charge-sheet regarding abetment of the suicide by the present applicant and since the ingredients of Section 107 of the IPC are not fulfilled, therefore, charge under Section 306 of the IPC could not be framed against the applicant. There was no overt act on the part of the applicant, which had driven the deceased for taking such step. It is alleged that co-accused-Sudeep is having illicit relationship with the applicant, which may be a reason for the deceased-Manish Verma to commit suicide but it does not falls within the act of abatement to commit suicide, therefore, the trial Court has committed error in framing the charge for commission of offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC against the applicant. Under these circumstances, he prayed for setting aside of the impugned order.