SIMRAN SINDHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dtd. 23/1/2024, passed by learned Additional Session Judge No. 1, Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar in Session Case No. 27/2019, whereby learned Trial Court framed the charges against the petitioners for offence under Sec. 306/34 IPC.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 10/2/2019 the complainant, Mukesh gave a written report to the Police Station Srivijaynagar inter alia alleging therein that his brother Sandeep, had committed suicide due to threats allegedly issued by the petitioners. Based on this report, the police registered FIR No. 36/2019. Following an investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the present petitioners before the competent Court. After hearing arguments regarding the framing of charges, the Court ultimately framed charges under Sec. 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners. Hence, this revision petition.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioners contended vehemently that no offence under Sec. 306 of the IPC is made out against the petitioners, as there is an absence of substantive evidence establishing their involvement in the alleged offence. It was argued that a suicide note, which was recovered in this case, mentioned the names of five individuals, including the petitioners. However, the police filed the challan only against the present petitioners, while exonerating two other accused persons, namely Ghanshyam Danga and Amit Nanda. The Counsel further submitted that the suicide note was sent for forensic science examination (FSL), and the report from the FSL concluded that "it has not been possible to express a definite opinion regarding authorship of the blue enclosed disputed writing stamped and marked as Q1." A careful examination of the suicide note reveals no indication that the present petitioners instigated or abetted the deceased in committing suicide, thus precluding the applicability of Sec. 306 IPC. Therefore, the Counsel contended that the Trial Court erred in framing the charge under Sec. 306/34 of the IPC. Learned Counsel placed reliance on recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mahendra Awase Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, in Cr. Appeal No. 221/2025, decided on 17/1/2025.