PAPPU KHARE Vs. STATE OF M.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (in short "the Code") calling in question the impugned order dated 19.06.2012 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge Dabra, District Gwalior in S.T. No.218/2012 whereby the charges of offence punishable under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code (in short "the Penal Code") was framed against the petitioner.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is that on 02.01.2012 at 22:45 o'clock Dr. D.R. Sagar Civil Hospital Dabra informed at Police Station Dabra that a woman named Bhagwati Valmik has been brought in the hospital in dead condition. On this information, a Merg No. 3/2012 was registered. During Merg enquiry, it was found that deceased-Bhagwati has died because the petitioner was having illicit relation with wife of Prakash Valmeek of Badoonkala. Because of this reason petitioner used to beat and harassed the deceased-Bhagwati. Six months before the death of the deceased the petitioner beat the deceased by means of lathi by which hand of the deceased got fractured. Thereafter the petitioner demanded Rs.One Lac, on refusal the petitioner told to kill the deceased. Because of all these reasons the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. Thereafter, offence under Section 306 of the Code has been registered against the petitioner and after investigation charge-sheet has been filed. After receiving the case on committal, Trial Court framed the charges against the petitioner under Section 306 of the Penal Code.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the ingredients of the offence under Section 306 of the Code are not fulfilled and no iota of evidence is available on record to implicate the petitioner. He further submitted that learned Trial Court has erred in law in framing charge against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Code while no material evidence available on record to prove the fact that the petitioner has abated or instigated the deceased to commit suicide. To Bolster his submissions counsel relied on the judgment of Hariom Vs. State of MP, 2007 1 MPLJ 195, Santosh Vishwakarma and another Vs. State of MP (Now CG),2004 3 MPHT 57 (CG), State of M.P. Vs. Ganesh Ram, 1997 2 MPJR 163, Dayalan Babu & another Vs. State, 2011 CRLJ 359, Mahendra Singh and another VS. State of M.P., 1995 AIR(SCW) 4570, Bhagwan Das Vs. Kartar Singh and others, 2007 AIR(SC) 2045, S.S. Chheena Vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan and another, 2010 12 SCC 190 and M. Mohan Vs. State, 2011 AIR(SC) 1238.