S. B. SAKRIKAR, J. ( 1 ) THE appellant/accused has directed this appeal, against the judgment dated 5-8-1993, rendered by III Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam in S. T. No. 164/92, thereby convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 306, IPC and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of fine further imprisonment for one year was also awarded. ( 2 ) THE case of the prosecution, in short, is that Laxmanrao (PW 2) husband of deceased Lallibai and the appellant were residing in a jail quarters numbered as 10 and 8 respectively at Sailana. Both were posted as jail guards. It is stated that on 30th April, 1992, while Laxmanrao had gone to Indore for some official work, during his absence, the appellant Ranjeet Singh caught hold deceased Lallibai with an intention to outrage her modesty. The FIR was lodged by the deceased at Police Station Sailana. On the report of the deceased, Crime No. 65/92 for the offence punishable under Section 354, IPC, was registered against the accused/appellant and the accused/appellant was arrested. After the aforesaid incident, on 6-5-1992 between 5. 00 p. m. to 9. 00 p. m. deceased Lallibai committed suicide in her quarter by hanging herself to the ceiling fan with the help of sari. On information of Laxmanrao (PW 2) merg report was registered and on investigation, offence under Section 306, IPC was registered against the accused/appellant and on completion of investigation, challan was filed. ( 3 ) THE trial Court framed the charge under Section 306, IPC against the accused. On completion of the trial, the accused was convicted and sentenced by the impugned judgment as indicated above. Aggrieved, the accused! appellant has filed this appeal against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. ( 4 ) I have heard Mr. M. L Khan learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Abdul Salim learned Penal Lawyer for the State. ( 5 ) THE Counsel for the appellant contended that from the facts and circumstances of the case, offence punishable under Section 306. IPC was not made out against the appellant/accused. The Counsel submitted that there is no iota of evidence to show that alleged suicide was committed by deceased Lallibai on the abetment of the accused/ appellant. According to the counsel for the appellant for constituting an offence u/sec. IPC was not made out against the appellant/accused. The Counsel submitted that there is no iota of evidence to show that alleged suicide was committed by deceased Lallibai on the abetment of the accused/ appellant. According to the counsel for the appellant for constituting an offence u/sec. 306, IPC, it is necessary for the prosecution to prove that the accused has committed such acts amounting to abetment due to which the deceased committed suicide. In support of the contention the counsel relied on the decision of this Court reported in Hallow v State of M. P. . ( 6 ) IN oppugnation learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State supported the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence holding the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 306, IPC. ( 7 ) IT is not disputed that the deceased died of a suicidal death. The fact of suicidal death of Lallibai stands proved from the statement of Laxmanrao (PW 2), Jagdeesh (PW 4) and Dr. Nirmal Kumar Choudhari (PW 1), who conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and submitted P. M. Report, Exh. P/1. From the statements of the aforesaid witnesses and P. M. Report, Exh. P/i this fact stands proved that deceased Lallibai died of asphyxia due to hanging. The finding of the trial Court on the point of suicidal death of Lallibai deserves affirmation. ( 8 ) AS per case of the prosecution, about 5/6 days prior to the death of the deceased the accused had committed indecent act with her amounting to outrage the modesty of a woman due to which she felt ashamed of and under the stress and strain she committed suicide. From the evidence of the prosecution, this fact is proved that the deceased had lodged a report against the appellant/ accused stating that on 30th May 1992 when her husband had gone to Indore at the relevant time, the appellant with a bad intention caught hold of the deceased and outraged the modesty. In view of the, aforesaid evidence on record the only question remains for consideration is that whether the alleged act of the appellant committed about 5-6 days prior to the incident had abetted the deceased to commit suicide. In view of the, aforesaid evidence on record the only question remains for consideration is that whether the alleged act of the appellant committed about 5-6 days prior to the incident had abetted the deceased to commit suicide. Even if it is assumed that the appellant had committed an indecent act amounting to outrage the modesty of a woman, the same in the opinion of this Court does to amount to abet the deceased to commit suicide. If the deceased had felt ashamed of for the aforesaid incident, she would have committed suicide on the same day and would not have waited for 6 days for the purpose. ( 9 ) IN the case of Halloo v. State of M. P. (supra) this Court in the similar sets of facts and circumstances has held that under the circumstances, the only question requiring consideration of this Court is whether the appellant by throwing a stone on the deceased a day before the incident had abetted the commission of suicide. Even if it is assumed that the appellant had an eye on the deceased and had thrown pebble, for that reason, the same in the opinion of this Court, does not amount to abet the deceased to commit suicide. If the deceased had felt shame only for that reason, she should have committed suicide on the day of the incident itself and not waited for 24 hours for that purpose. ( 10 ) IN the case of Basant Kumar and Ors. v. State of M. P. , the same view was reiterated and held that the incident of cruelty with the deceased much prior to the date of incident - not conclusive circumstance to hold accused guilty for abetment to commit suicide. ( 11 ) IN Mahaveer Singhs case, considering the meaning of a word abetment this court has held that for abetment there must be some investigation, persuasion, urge forward, stimulation, impelling or encouraging features are necessary for committing a particular act. ( 12 ) IN view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the law applicable to the case at hand, it cannot be held that the deceased Lallibai on the date of the incident had committed suicide on the abetment of the accused/appellant. ( 12 ) IN view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the law applicable to the case at hand, it cannot be held that the deceased Lallibai on the date of the incident had committed suicide on the abetment of the accused/appellant. In my considered opinion, the trial Court has committed an error in holding the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 306, IPC and for this reason, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered by the trial Court deserve to be set aside. ( 13 ) CONSEQUENTLY, this appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence passed against the appellant hold him guilty for the offence u/sec. 306, IPC is accordingly set aside and the appellant is acquitted of the offence charged against him. The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds stand discharged. Appeal allowed. .