SATVEER SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the impugned order dated 10. 5. 2002, whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge, No. 2 (Fast Track), Kota, ordered to frame charge under Section 306 IPC against both the accused petitioners in Sessions Case No. 147/2001.

(2.) THE relevant facts in brief are that the complainant Prakash Chand Jain (father of deceased Jitendra Jain), submitted a written ruport at Police Station, Rampura, Kota on 21. 4. 2001, with the averments that Jitendra Kumar Jain was appointed as Medical Representative in September 1999, in Menarini Ranaq Pharma Ltd. a registered company. Jitendra Kumar Jain attended a meeting at Jaipur on 15. 3. 2001, which was also attended by accused petitioners as representative of the company. Both the accused petitioners misbehaved with his son and told

(3.) SECTION 306 IPC provides that if any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment as provided in this SECTION. SECTION 107 IPC defines the term `abetment'. A person abets the doing of a thing, who instigates any person to do that thing or intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. When considered the entire evidence in the light of the definition of the `abetment', no offence under SECTION 306 IPC is prima facie made out in view of the judgments reported in case of Swamy Prahaladdas and Sanju alias Sanjay Singh (both supra ). There was no means rea at all on the part of both the accused petitioners. As stated here-in-above, both the letters dated 8. 3. 2001 and 9. 4. 2001, neither contain any threat or abusive language so as to create any such tension with drived the deceased to commit suicide. Assuming that both the accused petitioners uttered such words as mentioned in the suicidal note in the meeting which was held on 15. 3. 2001, these words do not amount to instigation as defined under SECTION 107 IPC and there is absolute lacking of mens rea for compelling the deceased to commit suicide. According to the prosecution case the deceased committed suicide after 32 days of the meeting and it can not be said that the suicide was the direct result of the words uttered in the meeting on 15. 3. 2001. Therefore, charge under SECTION 306 IPC is not even prima facie made out.