SHARAD Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has preferred this criminal revision under Sec. 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the impugned order dtd. 15/5/2023 passed in S.T. No. 58/2023, whereby the charge under Sec. 306 read with Sec. 34 of IPC has been framed against the petitioner.

(2.) As per the prosecution story, complainant lodged an FIR at P.S. Jeevajiganj, Ujjain on 17/8/2020 by stating that his son Akash was having some financial transaction with the petitioner/accused prior to the incident. On 16/8/2020 present petitioner mentally and physically harassed the deceased for non payment of his money, due to which on 17/8/2020 in the morning time Akash has committed suicide by hanging himself. The deceased also left a suicide note in which name of the petitioner has been mentioned. After the Merg inquiry, offence has been registered against the present petitioner and other co-accused persons.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. Mere demand of borrowed amount cannot be considered as abetment of suicide. The impugned order passed by the learned trial Court is contrary to the law and facts and the material available on record and in the suicide note no incriminating material has been found against the present petitioner except the omnibus allegation. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a reputed businessman and not having any criminal past. Hence, he prays that the impugned order be set aside and the petitioner be discharged from all the charges. He has also placed reliance upon the order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vedprakash Bhaiji Vs. State of M.P. reported in 1994 JLJ 758 [LQ/MPHC/1994/188] and the order dtd. 1/10/2018 passed in the case of Ratanlal Vs. State of M.P. in Criminal Revision No. 4485/2018.