RAJIV AGRAWAL Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by Rajiv Agrawal and Sukhendra Singh Baghel to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and to quash the charge-sheet of Crime No.281/2016, registered at Police Station, Kamla Nagar, Bhopal for offence under section 306 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The factual matrix of the prosecution case, in brief, is that on 27.7.2016 at about 1.00 pm Amol was inside the room. When he did not open the door, it was broken. Amol was found dead by hanging himself in the ceiling fan. His body was taken to the hospital, where he was declared dead. The postmortem report reveals that he died due to asphyxia, as a result ante mortem hanging. Ligature mark was found on his neck. Inquest was made. Subsequently, it was found that the deceased-Amol was working as a builder. The accused persons advanced certain money to the deceased, because of which he had agreed to sell the House No.502 to the petitioners. Because of their harassment, the deceased committed suicide. On the basis of which, FIR at Crime No.281/2016 for offence under section 306 of I.P.C. has been registered against the petitioners. Charge-sheet has been filed before the competent court and after committal, the same is pending before 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal for trial.

(3.) On behalf of the petitioners, it is claimed that the petitioners are innocent. They have been falsely implicated. The petitioners advanced certain amount to the deceased but the demand of advanced loan amount, in any manner, would not constitute the offence under section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, therefore, when the abatement to commit suicide is absent, offence under section 306 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out. It is also claimed that the brother-in-law of the deceased Atul Agnibhoz has stated that the deceased committed suicide for other reasons. The prosecution story also indicates that wife of petitioner No.1 and his daughter had gone to the house of the deceased for return of money. The deceased died after three days. There was no connection of death of the deceased with the petitioners. Therefore, the entire charge-sheet is liable to be quashed.