1 cri appln 1297.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1297 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus 1. Mangal Harichandra Raut (Mali) and others .. Respondents Shri V. G. Shelke, A.P.P. for the Applicant/State. Shri S. P. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM : S. S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 10TH FEBRUARY, 2011. PER COURT : . Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for applicant/State and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Perused the impugned judgment and also the original record made available. Since the Trial Court has extensively stated the facts in the impugned judgment same are not repeated here. 2. Upon perusal of the evidence brought on record by the prosecution it appears that the incident in question had taken 2 cri appln 1297.10 place on 28 th March, 2008, however, complaint had been lodged on 30 th April, 2008 i. e. after 32 days from the date of incident. The alleged dying declaration of deceased recorded on 28 th March, 2008 has not been convincingly proved, prosecution version viz- a-viz contents of dying declaration and other prosecution witnesses, daughter of the deceased does not inspire confidence. Therefore, the Trial Court taking into consideration contradictions and also the contents of the dying declaration and also filing belated complaint has taken a view that the respondents are not guilty of the offence alleged against them. 3. I find considerable force in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respondents that without admitting but assuming for a moment that the alleged incident had taken place and respondents had quarrel with the deceased in the morning of 28 th April, 2008, however, the question remains that whether said quarrel was intended or abeted the commission of suicide of the deceased. In my opinion, upon perusal of the provisions of Section 107 and also Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, the most important ingredient of said sections are that there should be instigation direct or indirect incitement or intention to abete such commission of suicide. On taking into consideration entire 3 cri appln 1297.10 evidence on record, I do not think that the respondents instigated either directly or indirectly or intended that the deceased would commit suicide. Therefore, in my opinion, the prosecution evidence brought on record is not sufficient to hold the respondent guilty of the offence U/Sec. 306 of the I. P. Code. It is not necessary to burden this order by catina of decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the subject that while entertaining the cases for the offence punishable U/Sec. 306 of I. P. Code, the Court should be very careful while scrutinizing the evidence. Unless the ingredients of Sec. 107 and 306 of the I. P. Code are fulfilled, no conviction can be sustained U/Sec. 306 of the I. P. Code. 4. Therefore, no case is made out to interfere with the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court. The possible view has been taken by the Trial Court on the basis of evidence brought on record by the parties. There is also another reason to acquit the respondents that the complaint is lodged after 32 days from the date of incident and that raises considerable doubt about authenticity and genuineness of the complaint. Therefore, application is devoid of any merit and same stands rejected. Consequently, leave to file appeal stands refused. The original 4 cri appln 1297.10 record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned lower Court forthwith. The application stands disposed of. [S. S. SHINDE, J.] bsb/Feb. 11