JUDGMENT D.K. Sinha, J.--The instant Criminal Revision is directed against the order impugned dated 20.9.2010 recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, 1st, Dhanbad by which the petition filed on behalf of the petitioners for their discharge in Sessions Trial No. 555 of 2009 was rejected. 2. The prosecution story in short was that the informant Lav Kumar Singh had presented a written report before Dhanbad Police on 5.2.2006 stating, inter alia, that his maternal uncle in relation namely Nirbhay Kumar Singh was working as the private driver of one Shiv Kumar Khemka, who happened to be the Secretary of Dwarika Das Jalan Memorial Hospital, Dhanbad for the last 6/7 years. On the day of reporting the informant heard rumour that his maternal uncle Nirbhay Kumar Singh died in Jalan Hospital. Upon such rumour when the informant went to the house of the employer Shiv Kumar Khemka, he was apprised that Nirbhay Kumar Singh had already left his job a week prior and also asked the informant to enquire his whereabouts at Jalan Hospital. The informant went to Jalan Hospital and came across Dr. Anand Mohan Roy @ A.M. Roy, who apprised that Nirbhay Kumar Singh had committed suicide by hanging from the roof and that his dead body was lying on the bed. He went to up-stairs in the room and found the dead body of his maternal uncle on the bed. The informant gathered that theft of cash was committed from the cash box of the Hospital room to which allegation was levelled against Nirbhay Kumar Singh about his involvement in such theft. The informant had reason to believe that his maternal uncle Nirbhay Kumar Singh was done to death by Shiv Kumar Khemka and Dr. Anand Mohan Roy @ A.M. Roy and his dead body was hanging from the ceiling by giving the colour of suicide. Dhanbad Police registered P.S. Case No. 89 of 2006 under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code against both the named accused who are petitioners herein but charge-sheet after investigation was submitted under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned Sr. Counsel Mr. Mazumdar submitted that the petitioner No.1 Dr. Dhanbad Police registered P.S. Case No. 89 of 2006 under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code against both the named accused who are petitioners herein but charge-sheet after investigation was submitted under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned Sr. Counsel Mr. Mazumdar submitted that the petitioner No.1 Dr. Anand Mohan Roy @ A.M. Roy was the medical practitioner by profession and was attached to D.O. Jalan Hospital whereas the petitioner No.2 Shiv Kumqr Khemka was the Secretary of the said Hospital at the relevant time and both were admitted to anticipatory bail. As a matter of fact, an information was sent to the concerned police station stating that Nirbhay Kumar Singh had committed suicide in non-AC. Cabin and upon such information, the A.S.I. of Police came there and enquired from Manoj Mohan Srivastava, who was the Chief Security Officer of D.O. Jalan Memorial Hospital and recorded his statement and sent the dead body for post mortem. The Chief Security Officer, Manoj Mohan Srivastava, who had informed the police earlier about the occurrence of theft of cash from the Hospital and his statement was recorded on 5.2.2006 wherein he stated that on 4.2.2006 he came to learn that theft of cash was committed after breaking open the lock of the box and it was revealed during investigation that Nirbhay Kumar Singh (since deceased), who was driver of Shiv Kumar Khemka was seen roaming near the store room in suspicious condition. Nirbhay Kumar Singh was interrogated about the theft of money as the suspect and was asked to stay in the Hospital. Manoj Mohan Srivastava explained that when came to the Hospital on the subsequent day morning he was informed by his security staff that Nirbhay Kumar Singh had committed suicide in a non-AC. Room No.1 by hanging himself from the ceiling. The other witnesses including one Dr. K.K. Sharma came there who declared Nirbhay Singh dead. Inquest report also revealed that the death appeared to have been caused due to hanging. 4. Learned Sr. Counsel Mr. Mazumdar further submitted that one Rajesh Kumar Thakur, security guard of the Jalan Hospital in his statement recorded during investigation of the case narrated that in the morning of 4.5.2006 he noticed from the glass window that one person was hanging with ceiling fan in a non-AC. Room situated at first floor. 4. Learned Sr. Counsel Mr. Mazumdar further submitted that one Rajesh Kumar Thakur, security guard of the Jalan Hospital in his statement recorded during investigation of the case narrated that in the morning of 4.5.2006 he noticed from the glass window that one person was hanging with ceiling fan in a non-AC. Room situated at first floor. He went near the window and found that it was the driver of the Secretary and gathered that the door of the cabin was closed from inside. The matter was immediately informed to the staff of the Hospital and the dead body of Nirbhay Kumar Singh was lowered down from the ceiling fan. The witness further narrated that Nirbhay Singh was interrogated by Manoj Jee and Somnath only in connection with theft of cash from the cash box and not by the petitioners herein. 5. Learned Sr. Counsel pointed out that the place of occurrence from where the dead body was recovered was inspected and visited by the Investigating Officer who found that the latch of the door of the non-A.C. room, in fact, was broken from inside. The petitioners, as a matter of fact, the learned Counsel added, had arrived at the Hospital on receiving information from the security guard of the Hospital and witnessed the body of Nirbhay Kumar Singh hanging through the ceiling fan. The latches of the door was then broken and the dead body was brought down. The witnesses were consistent that during commission of theft of the cash from the cash box Nirbhay Singh was found roaming around the store room in suspicious condition and for that he was interrogated by the security officer of the Hospital and not by the petitioners. Nirbhay Singh was cautioned during interrogation that he might be prosecuted for his criminal act of theft. The witnesses such as Umesh Rajwar and Madan Singh were also consistent in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that the deceased was interrogated by the security personnels and consequently Nirbhay Singh committed suicide in a non-A.C. Room No.1. Many other witnesses viz. Nirbhay Singh was cautioned during interrogation that he might be prosecuted for his criminal act of theft. The witnesses such as Umesh Rajwar and Madan Singh were also consistent in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that the deceased was interrogated by the security personnels and consequently Nirbhay Singh committed suicide in a non-A.C. Room No.1. Many other witnesses viz. Rit Kumar, Dinesh Mahato, Kusum Kumari, Meena Kumari and Parwati Devi were also interrogated by the police during course of investigation and all of them were consistent that the deceased was the driver of Shiv Kumar Khemka and he was found in tension for the last few days after theft was detected in the Store Room of the Hospital and Nirbhay Kumar Singh was seen roaming around there prior to theft of cash. In the post mortem, no external injury was found on the body and the cause of death of Nirbhay Singh was observed to be on account of asphyxia as a result of hanging. A theft of sum of about Rs. 40/45 thousand was committed on 4.2.2006 from the cash box of the Hospital, which was kept in the Store Room and the complicity of deceased was suspected in the alleged theft. 6. Advancing his argument, Mr. Mazumdar further submitted that the, petitioner Dr. Anand Mohan Roy @ A.M. Roy was the Chief of Medical Services of D.O. Jalan Hospital, Dhanbad his duty was on honorary basis confined only to medical services to the patient, such as, engagement of Doctors, nurses, paramedical staffs, technicians of different Departments and running proper services to the patients. The deceased Nirbhay Kumar Singh was not the patient in the Hospital, rather he was dismissed from his service prior to the occurrence. Petitioner No.2 Shiv Kumar Khemka was also honorary Secretary of Jiwan Rekha Trust and was managing D.O. Jalan Hospital. He was also the President of Dhanbad Public School and one Montessori School running by charitable trust known as Maharaja Agrasen Trust. 7. Assailing the order impugned, learned Senior Counsel submitted that the prayer of the petitioners for their discharge was mechanically rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge without application of judicial mind and ignoring the fact that there was no material at all in the case diary against the petitioners to implicate them for the offence under Sections 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. None of the witnesses examined in course of investigation by the I.O. could reveal that the petitioners had ever abetted Nirbhay Singh to commit suicide. Even there was no material to infer that Nirbhay Singh had committed suicide consequent to abetment made by the petitioners. The prayer for discharge of the petitioners was rejected by the impugned order observing that the deceased was interrogated and pressurized by the Security Officer and other staff of the Jalan Hospital but for that the petitioners should not have been made liable. The learned Court dismissed the discharge petition only on the ground that though the petitioner Dr. Anand Mohan Roy @ A.M. Roy had stated to the informant that the dead body was hanging from the fan but the informant found the dead body on the bed and that the shirt of the deceased was tied on a ceiling fan which could not be a reasonable ground for rejection of the prayer for discharge of the petitioners. The facts relevant to the instant case have been misconceived and prayer of the petitioner could not be considered in its right perspective by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 8. The Supreme Court of India in Netai Dutta vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 2005 Cr.L.J. 1737 observed, "There is absolutely no averment in the alleged suicide note that the present appellant had caused any harm to him or was in any way responsible for delay in paying salary to deceased Pranab Kumar Nag. It seems that the deceased was very much dissatisfied with the working conditions at the work place. But, it may also be noticed that the deceased after his transfer in 1999 had never joined the office at 160, B.L. Saha Road, Kolkata and had absented himself for a period of two years and that the suicide took place on 16.2.2001. It cannot be said that the present appellant had in any way instigated the deceased to commit suicide or he was responsible for the suicide of Pranab Kumar Nag. An offence under Section 306 I.P.C. would stand only if there is an abetment for the commission of the crime. The parameters of the 'abetment' have been stated in Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. An offence under Section 306 I.P.C. would stand only if there is an abetment for the commission of the crime. The parameters of the 'abetment' have been stated in Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 197 says that a person abets the doing of a thing, who instigated any person to do that thing; or engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, or the person should have intentionally aided any act or illegal omission. The explanation to Section 107 says that any wilful misrepresentation or wiful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, may also come within the contours of abetment." 9. In the instant case admittedly no suicide note was left out by the deceased Nirbhay Singh so as to put prima facie criminal liability upon the petitioners as the abettors for the commission of suicide by Nirbhay Singh and in my opinion the allegation levelled by the informant was nothing but wild allegations against the petitioners and that no material could be brought in the case diary or on the record so as to prima facie implicate the petitioners that they were perpetrator or abettor consequent to which Nirbhay Singh committed suicide. There appears merit in the instant Criminal Revision, accordingly, it is allowed. The order impugned is set aside and the petitioners are discharged in Dhanbad P.S. Case No. 84 of 2006, corresponding to G.R. No. 382 of 2006 (ST. No. 555 of 2009), pending before the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Dhanbad.