1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.780 OF 2006. The State of Maharashtra ... Appellant. Versus Anil S/o Laxman Mate and another ... Respondents. ... Mrs.R.D.Reddy, A.P.P.for the Appellant. Mr.M.B.Kolpe, advocate for the Respondent. ... CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J. Date : 23.07.2009. PER COURT 1. Heard. 2. The appeal is preferred against an order of acquittal rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, in Sessions Case No.70/2003, whereby the Respondents have been acquitted for 2 offence punishable U/s 306 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. 3. The long and short of the prosecution case is that the accused persons insisted deceased Samadhan, who was young son of complainant Smt.Shantabai to marry Daivashala, who happens the daughter of the Respondent No.3 Ankush because they suspected that there was sexual relationship between said Samadhan and Daivashala. They had threatened Samadhan that if you will not perform marriage with Daivashala then he may not be allowed to reside in the village. On some occasion, he was beaten up by them. According to the prosecution, Samadhan committed suicide by hanging himself to a branch of Mango tree situated in field of one Manik Kerba Bhatlawande in the outskirts of the village. The incident of his suicide occurred on 4.5.2003. The prosecution came out with a case that suicide of said Samadhan was culmination of harassment meted out to him by the Respondents/accused. 3 4. Heard learned A.P.P. Smt.R.D.Reddy, for the appellant and learned counsel for the Respondent. 5. At the outset, it may be mentioned that for the purpose of proving offence U/s 306 of the I.P.C., it is necessary to establish ingredients of abetment as envisaged in Section 109 of the I.P.C. It has to be proved that the accused intentionally induced, goaded or enticed the deceased to commit suicide. The suicide note found on person of deceased Samadhan was not duly proved to be in his hand nor there was any evidence adduced as to how the suicide note was found on his person. The learned Sessions Judge held that the suicide note produced by the prosecution was not free from doubt. The evidence adduced by the prosecution comprises of witnesses who narrated that the Respondents had asked deceased Samadhan to marry Daivashala. It is difficult to attribute Criminal intention to the Respondents and it can not be said that they wanted to drive deceased Samadhan towards path of ending his life. The hypersensitivity of a 4 person or inability to control itself would not amount to inducement by others who allegedly troubled him. What transpires from the record is that deceased Samadhan had consented to the marriage and, therefore, the Respondents had reached Daivashala to house of the complainant with a view to ensure consortium between them. Considering the nature of evidence adduced by the prosecution and the circumstances brought on surface of the record, I find that the impugned judgment of acquittal can not be termed as irrational or improper. In this view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed. (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) asp/office/Crappeal178006