AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sushil Harkauli, Acting Chief Justice
This revision has been filed by the accused against an order framing charge and refusing discharge the accused for the offence u/s 306 IPC i.e. abetment to commit suicide. It was argued before the trial Court, as is recorded in the trial court''s order dated 9.6.2011, that the ingredients of abetment are not present. The allegation is that the accused used some obscene words to insult the deceased lady and thereafter the deceased committed suicide. There is no link material to even prima-facie suggests that by the alleged use of those words or by the acts allegedly committed by the accused, the accused intended or even knew that the deceased would commit suicide. Nor there is any material to suggest that because of the circumstances allegedly created by the accused the deceased was not left with any option except to commit suicide. Therefore, instigation cannot be inferred on the existing material. The learned State Counsel is not able to show anything else which could possibly lead to the inference that the circumstances created by the accused were of a nature wherein it could be reasonably inferred or anticipated by the accused that the deceased would commit suicide.
In the circumstances, the revision is allowed. The order dated 9.6.2011 passed in S.T. No.117/2011 by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen is quashed. The trial court will re-examine the matter. However, this order will not operate if the trial has already concluded.