JUDGMENT Mr. Alok Singh, J.: (Oral).- This is an application seeking regular bail in FIR No.67 dated 10.9.2010, under Sections 306/34 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station GRP Rewari, District Ambala Cantt. 2. Record reveals that on 23.7.2010 father of Satish Kumar Bagri (deceased) Dhanpat Singh Bagri has made statement before the GRP Rewari which is as under:- “Stated that I am the resident of above stated address and retired as SDO Electricity Board Kanina. I had two sons. The elder son was the deceased Satish Bagri and the younger one is Suresh Bagri. My daughter is married with Pardeep resident of Railway colony Rewari. I am residing along with my family at 134 Yadav Colony Balabgarh, Faridabad. My elder son Satish Bagri since died as doing service in LIC at Rewari and was residing along with his family at Krishna Nagar. Satish Bagri was having two sons and one daughter all are student and unmarried. Yesterday on 23.7.2010 I received a telephone from Bawal at Balabgarh that my son fell from the train and got injured and died at General Hospital Bawal. On this I along with my younger son Suresh Bagri went to the GH Bawal and there I found that my son Satish Bagri was lying dead. I had seen the dead body. The body is of my elder son Satish Bagri. I had inquired and found that he was coming from Jaipur to Rewari yesterday and he had to alight at Alwar but due to some work he did not alighted at Alwar and was coming to Straight Rewari and on the way at Bawal he fell down on the platform due to shaking of the train while changing it the track and got injured. Railways employees got admitted him at GH Hospital Bawal for the treatment and after some he died. I along with my son Suresh Bagri and other relatives have inquired and are satisfied that he had died because of suffering injuries after falling from the train. I have not any doubt regarding his death and God has written this in my fate. I have read over and heard the statement and found it correct. I have also received a copy of the same.” 3. I have not any doubt regarding his death and God has written this in my fate. I have read over and heard the statement and found it correct. I have also received a copy of the same.” 3. On 5.8.2010 SHO, GRPS, Rewari has prepared the inquest report as under:- “Today ASI Surinder Singh has presented the inquest report of Satish Bagri since dead to myself SI/SHo. Upon perusal it was found that the investigation has been completed. Deceased Satish Bagri was got injured by falling from a running train no. 9269 on the platform of Bawal. He was taken to GH Bawal for the treatment and here he died. Driver and the Guard of the train could not come to know that some passenger had fallen down from their train because Satish Bagri since dead was in the middle part of the train and was standing on the door window and fell down on account of shaking of the train. His death occurred due to Rail Accident. As per the Statements of relatives, PMR report, and from the investigation of myself SI/SHO, it was found Satish Bagri is died by Railway Accident and does not warrant any offence to be investigated by the police. Closure report regarding the death is tendered.” 4. Deceased Satish Kumar Bagri was found dead near the railway track on 23.7.2010. A diary, maintained by Satish Kumar Bagri-deceased, was found in which on 7.7.2010 Satish Kumar Bagri-deceased has noted that his wife Saroj is having illicit relations with her real uncle (chacha) Sudesh Kumar. Having found the diary, an FIR was lodged by the father of the deceased on 10.9.2010 contending that Satish Kumar Bagri has committed suicide because his wife was having illicit relations with her real uncle. On the said date case under Section 306 IPC was registered against the present accused i.e. Saroj and her chacha Sudesh Kumar. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that alleged suicide note dated 7.7.2010 shall not prove any instigation or abetment to commit suicide because Satish Kumar Bagri has died on 23.7.2010 and meanwhile Satish Kumar Bagri was having sufficient time to think whether to commit suicide or not. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that alleged suicide note dated 7.7.2010 shall not prove any instigation or abetment to commit suicide because Satish Kumar Bagri has died on 23.7.2010 and meanwhile Satish Kumar Bagri was having sufficient time to think whether to commit suicide or not. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that even cruel behaviour or harassment by having illicit relation with her own chacha without any mens rea to derive the deceased to commit suicide would not amount to abetment under Section 107 IPC. He has placed reliance on the following judgments :- (i) Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P., (2002) 5 Supreme Court Cases 371. (ii) Bhagwan Das Vs. Kartar Singh and others, 2007 (11) SCC 205. (iii) Sohan Raj Sharma Vs. State of Haryana, AIR 2008 SCW 3202. (iv) SS Chheena Vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan and another, 2010 (4) RCR (Criminal) 66. (v) M.Mohan Vs. State represented by Deputy Superintendent of Police (2011) 3 SCC 626. 6. Mr. Deepender Singh, Advocate appearing for the complainant has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of “Dammu Sreenu Versus State of A.P. reported in 2009 (3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 153” and has argued that illicit relations by wife of deceased with her own uncle resulted in humiliation and has derived the deceased to commit suicide. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that in Dammu Sreenu (supra) earlier decisions of Apex Court were neither cited nor considered. It seems that initially deceased was found lying dead near the railway track and case was considered to be a railway accident and later on after two months it was converted into a criminal offence punishable under Section 306 IPC on the basis of diary written by the deceased on 7.7.2010. Prima facie, it seems that humiliation suffered by deceased on account of illicit relation by his wife with her own uncle simplicitor without any mens rea to derive the deceased to commit suicide does not fall within the definition of abetment. Moreover, it is yet to be proved as to whether present is the case of Railway accident or suicide. 8. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, this is a fit case where bail should be granted to the accused. 9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Moreover, it is yet to be proved as to whether present is the case of Railway accident or suicide. 8. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, this is a fit case where bail should be granted to the accused. 9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Let petitioner be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. 10. Any observation made hereinabove is only for the purpose of deciding bail application and shall not be construed opinion on the merit of the case. ---------0.B.S.0------------