JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Heard forthwith by consent of parties. 2. By means of this application under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, the applicants have questioned the initiation of criminal proceedings via FIR No. 135/2010, dated 07/07/2010, registered under Section 306 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code with the Police Station, Buldhana (City), as also the consequent charge-sheet bearing no. 161/2010, dated 19/10/2010 and prayed to quash FIR No. 135/2010 and chargesheet no. 161/2010. 3. On the basis of report lodged by respondent no.2 (FIR No. 135/2010), dated 07/07/2010, offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code has been registered against the present applicants. Applicant no. 1 is serving as Executive Engineer in Minor Irrigation Department, Buldhana while applicant no. 2 is serving as Senior Grade Clerk in the same department. It was reported by non-applicant no. 2 namely Vijay Shrawan Bagde to the police on 07/07/2010, that deceased Rekha was his sister. On 04/07/2010, at about 9.15 O’ clock in the night, he had received information from one Sunil r/o. Buldhana, that Rekha admitted in General Hospital, Buldhana, as she had received burnt injuries. Accordingly, on 05/07/2010, at about 7.00 am, he approached to the General Hospital, Buldhana and saw his sister lying on the bed with burnt injuries on her person and undergoing treatment there. At that time, Sunil, Sharad Jadhav and 2-3 other persons from her office were present. At that time he enquired with his sister as to what had happened. Thereupon she replied that, Ms. Vitalkar, senior clerk working in her office was in need of draft of difference of VI Pay Commission, and hence she had asked her to get it from her computer. Ms. Vitalkar (applicant no.2) had told the said matter to Shri. Somwanshi Saheb, the Executive Engineer (applicant no.1) and thereupon Mr. Somwanshi asked Rekha not to cross madam (Ms. Vitalkar), and also transferred her to Akola and harassed her indirectly and hence on 4.07.10 at 7.15 O’clock in the evening, she had set herself on fire after pouring kerosene on her person in her residential house on getting fed up with the harassment at the hands of Mr. Somwanshi and Ms. Vitalkar. Mr. Jadhav, Clerk working in her office admitted her in General Hospital, Buldhana for treatment. Mr. Somwanshi and Ms. Vitalkar. Mr. Jadhav, Clerk working in her office admitted her in General Hospital, Buldhana for treatment. Mr. Shravan Bagde, brother of the deceased, reported that his sister died at about 9.45 pm on 07/07/2010, and requested to take action against the present applicants. 4. It appears that the investigation was carried out and thereafter statements of witnesses have been recorded. According to prosecution, the Executive Magistrate recorded statement of patient Rekha at about 1.00 to 1.10 am on 05/07/2010. It appears that after questioning her about full name, age, address and “As to what happened to you?” “HINDI” to which her reply was recorded in printed proforma of dying declaration. The said dying declaration is in Marathi language and being translated in English as below; “This day 4/7/2010 i.e. Sunday at about 7.15 p.m., I set myself on fire by pouring kerosene on my person because Ku. Vitalkar is an employee in the office. I am working as a Junior clerk in Irrigation department. Ku. Vitalkar, Senior Clerk was in need of the statement of difference of Sixth Pay Commission. I told her to get it from the computer. I was not having its copy with me. She told about this to Shri. Somwanshi, Executive Engineer. He asked me not to cross madam otherwise he would take action in writing. Thereafter, Shri. Somwanshi made my complaint with the Superintending Engineer and transferred me to Akola Research. I am suffering from Sickle Cell Anemia. Even then the Saheb transferred me to Akola directly and thereby directly put me to harassment and humiliating treatment. Hence I set myself on fire, by pouring kerosene on my person.” 5. It appears that Police Sub-Inspector – Mr. S. R. Patil, also recorded statement of deceased Rekha who narrated the incident which happened somewhere in the month of March – 2010. According to her, Vitalkar madam came to her and asked her verbally to give chart of difference in respect of Sixth Pay Commission. She (Rekha) had told her (Ms. Vitalkar) to get it from computer. Thereafter at various times, she sent one Chavan, Mr. Milind Nagve and Rahul Kamble to her whom she had told that she does not have the chart. She further stated that Ms. Vitalkar went to the Executive Engineer – Mr. Somwanshi and told him that she did not give chart to them. Mr. Vitalkar) to get it from computer. Thereafter at various times, she sent one Chavan, Mr. Milind Nagve and Rahul Kamble to her whom she had told that she does not have the chart. She further stated that Ms. Vitalkar went to the Executive Engineer – Mr. Somwanshi and told him that she did not give chart to them. Mr. Somwanshi then called her (Rekha), Vitalkar madam, Ingle and Jadhav-Sr.Clerk. Mr. Somwanshi said, Vitalkar madam is of no use, you are also of no use. She met the boss once again. Meanwhile, Vitalkar madam came there and abused her by alleging that she is a prostitute. Thereafter in April according to her, she abused Vitalkar madam in front of one Chavan, Pawar and Ingle. Deceased was given relieving memo on 17/06/10, as she was transferred to Akola before two years, but she did not report at Akola. Therefore, she was asked again to report at transferred place at Akola by memo dated 21/6/2010. On 25/6/10, she went to meet applicant no. 1 and asked for permission to meet the Superintending Engineer Saheb, but she was not permitted to meet him. She was asked to report her duty at the transferred place on 30/6/10. Since then her mental condition was not good. In the result she committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her person and set herself ablazed. 6. Statement of Mr. Damodar Eknath Jadhav, Senior Clerk of Minor Irrigation Division, Buldhana was also recorded in the course of the investigation, who used to reside with Rekha since one month prior to the incident. He stated that on 4/7/10 at about 7.00 to 7.30 p.m., when he was returning after answering the nature call he saw Rekha in burning condition. She had sustained burn injuries, and therefore, Mr. Sunil Gavai, working in Minor Irrigation Division, Buldhan had taken her to the General Hospital, Buldhana for treatment. According to the witness (Jadhav), Rekha was working under him and she used to tell him that she had been transferred. Vitalkar madam was asking Shri. Somwanshi to relieve her and if Rekha went to meet Mr. Somwanshi he used to scold her at the instance of Vitalkar madam and therefore on getting fed up with the harassment at the hands of Mr. Somwanshi and Ms. Vitalkar, she poured kerosene on her person and set herself ablaze. 7. Vitalkar madam was asking Shri. Somwanshi to relieve her and if Rekha went to meet Mr. Somwanshi he used to scold her at the instance of Vitalkar madam and therefore on getting fed up with the harassment at the hands of Mr. Somwanshi and Ms. Vitalkar, she poured kerosene on her person and set herself ablaze. 7. Learned Advocate for the applicants submitted that even if all the accusations are accepted as they are, still mens rea is an essential ingredient in any criminal offence and the material must indicate the nature of mens rea that can be imputed to the accused in any criminal prosecution. Learned Advocate made reference to the ruling in case of Nathulal V/s. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in AIR 1966 Supreme Court 43in which the Apex Court observed that mens rea is essential ingredient of criminal offence. He also made reference to the ruling in case of Madan Mohan Singh V/s. State of Gujrath and another reported in 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 3245 Supreme Courtwherein the Apex Court observed in para 11 thus; “Insofar as Section 306, IPC is concerned, even at the cost of repetition, we may say that merely because a person had a grudge against his superior officer and committed suicide on account of that grudge, even honestly feeling that he was wronged, it would still not be a proper allegation for basing the charge under Section 306, IPC. It will still fall short of a proper allegation. It would have to be objectively seen whether the allegations made could reasonably be viewed as proper allegations against the appellant/accused to the effect that he had intended or engineered the suicide of the concerned person by his acts, words etc. The Apex Court observed and concluded that FIR falls short. It was also observed that baseless and irrelevant allegations could not be used as a basis for prosecution for a serious offence under Section 306, IPC.” 8. Learned advocate for the Applicants also made reference to the ruling in case of Gangula Mohan Reddy V/s. State of A.P., reported in 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 615 (S.C.).The Apex Court in paragraphs 20 and 21 observed thus; “20.... Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Learned advocate for the Applicants also made reference to the ruling in case of Gangula Mohan Reddy V/s. State of A.P., reported in 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 615 (S.C.).The Apex Court in paragraphs 20 and 21 observed thus; “20.... Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. 21.... The intention of the Legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court is clear that in order to convict a person under section 306, IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide.” 9. Learned advocate for the applicants also made reference to the ruling in case of Sanju alias Sanjay Singh Sengar V/s. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in AIR 2002 SC 1998 in which the Apex Court on plain reading of suicide note observed thus; “A plain reading of the suicide note would clearly show that the deceased was in great stress and depressed. One plausible reason could be that the deceased was without any work or avocation and at the same time indulged in drinking as revealed from the statement of the wife-Smt. Neelam Sengar. Hewas a frustrated man. Reading of the suicide note will clearly suggest that such a note is not a handy work of a man with sound mind and sense. Apex Court is also of the view that the ingredients of ‘abetment’ are totally absent to make out an offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. In the result, charge-sheet for an offence under Section 306, I.P.C., is quashed.” 10. Apex Court is also of the view that the ingredients of ‘abetment’ are totally absent to make out an offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. In the result, charge-sheet for an offence under Section 306, I.P.C., is quashed.” 10. Learned advocate for the applicant also made reference to the ruling in case of Shankar s/o. Vishwanath Kolhe and another V/s. State of Maharashtra reported in 2006 ALL MR (Cri) 790, wherein the Bombay High Court observed in para 26 as follows; “The prosecution evidence does not lead to bring on record other evidence of facts preceding or after utterances of these words to push to a conclusion that these words have ignited to the decision of self-destruction of Vithabai.” 11. Learned APP and Advocate for non-applicant no. 2 submitted that in the dying declaration deceased Rekha has specifically narrated the incident which made her to commit suicide on account of harassment suffered by her at the hands of applicants. He submits that the charge-sheet is already filed and applicants have to undergo trial on merits. 12. Looking to the elements of an offence punishable under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code, it is necessary that there must be some evidence to attribute certain acts on the part of the accused who allegedly abetted the deceased to commit suicide so as to constitute the offence punishable under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code. Under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, abettor is punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. The abetment as defined in Section 107 of Indian Penal Code which reads thus; “A person abets the doing of a thing, who – First – Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly-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, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly-Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing”. 13. 13. What is instigation or abetment have been explained by the Apex Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar Versus State of Chhatisgarh reported in 2001(7) SCC 298.Relevant observations of the Apex Court are as under; “K. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do “an act”. To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case whee the accused had by his acts of omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation. A victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance, discord and differences were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the Court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty.” 14. In the ruling of Madan Mohan Singh V/s. State of Gujrath and another reported in 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 3245 SCthe Apex Court observed in para 9 as below: “9.... It is absurd to even think that a superior officer like the appellant would intend to bring about suicide of his driver and, therefore, abet the offence. In fact, there is no nexus between the so called suicide (if at all it is one for which also there is no material on record) and any of the alleged acts on the part of the appellant. There is no proximity either. In the prosecution under Section 306, IPC, much more material is required. The Courts have to be extremely careful as the main person is not available for cross-examination by the appellant/accused. There is no proximity either. In the prosecution under Section 306, IPC, much more material is required. The Courts have to be extremely careful as the main person is not available for cross-examination by the appellant/accused. Unless, therefore, there is specific allegation and material of definite nature (not imaginary or inferential one), it would be hazardous to ask the appellant / accused to face the trial. A criminal trial is not exactly pleasant experience. The person like the appellant in present case who is serving in a responsible post would certainly suffer great prejudice, were he to face prosecution on absurd allegations of irrelevant nature.” 15. Bearing in mind these observations and perusing the documents on record, it is not possible to say that the imputations made to these applicants would amount to abetment to commit suicide punishable under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code. In the facts and circumstances revealed from the material collected during the course of investigation in this case, this is a exceptional case where inherent powers vested with this Court by virtue of Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code are required to be used to prevent unnecessary harassments of the applicants herein. The material borne out from record would indicate that the deceased was suffering from the mental disease known as “Sickle Cell Anemia” and therefore she was not in good mental position. The alleged incident has occurred in the month of March 2010 and she decided to end her life on 4th July 2010. The long time gap also substantiates the case of the applicants. She was ghastly suffering from disease and therefore decided to end her life maybe because of over-sensitiveness taking tension of the superior officer as also general transfer order which was passed on 29th May 2010, issued from Vigilance Squad, Amravati Circle, Irrigation Division, Amravati, indicating that the general transfer was effected under the directives from the Government in the interest of public services and administrative convenience. The accused had no role to issue transfer order of the deceased who was transferred from Buldhana to Akola, by the general transfer order (Sr. No. 18). Looking from all angles, there is no material to show involvement of the present applicants even prima-facie. The accused had no role to issue transfer order of the deceased who was transferred from Buldhana to Akola, by the general transfer order (Sr. No. 18). Looking from all angles, there is no material to show involvement of the present applicants even prima-facie. Under these circumstances, to avoid unnecessary harassment of the applicants, inherent powers available under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure are required to be exercised in such deserving case. 16. Hence application is allowed. First Information Report No. 135/2010, dated 07/07/2010 registered under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC and consequent charge-sheet bearing No. 161/2010, dated 19/10/2010, 306 read with 34 of IPC are hereby quashed. Application stands disposed of accordingly.