JUDGMENT Mr. Mahesh Grover, J. (Oral) - This is an application under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. praying for leave to appeal against judgment dated 21.1.2010 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, vide which acquittal has been awarded to the private respondents. 2. The son of the complainant died on 1.7.2006 by jumping into the well. He had gone to the house of the accused persons i.e. private respondents, to bring back Shakuntla, his legally wedded wife. This led to the allegations against the present respondents that they have contributed to the death of the deceased and which resulted into initiation of proceedings under Section 306 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant contends that once the death took place in the house of the respondents, the onus to prove innocence rested squarely on their shoulders. The applicant is the one who alleged that the deceased was harassed which led to his death and blamed the accused-respondents for such harassment. 4. The evidence on record, however, does not suggest that the accused-respondents were, in any way, instrumental in exhorting the deceased to suicide. Even if it is accepted that there was some friction between the families, that ipso facto would not lead to a conclusion that this would be the cause of death so as to hold the accused culpable under the provisions of Section 306 IPC. 5. Section 306 IPC relates to abetment to commit suicide but if the meaning of abetment has to be seen, then one has to fell back on the definition of abetment as contained under Section 107 IPC which is extracted as under:- “107. Abetment of a thing 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. Explanation1:- A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. Explanation1:- A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. Illustration A, a public officer, is authorized by a warrant from a Court of Justice to apprehend Z. B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z, willfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the apprehension of C. Explanation 2: - Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.” 6. It is thus to be established that a person has instigated any person to do a particular thing by leading cogent evidence to this effect. A simple fact of harassment would not satisfy ingredients of Section 107 IPC and thus, hold a person culpable for an offence under Section 306 IPC. 7. I do not, thus, find it to be a fit case where the prayer under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. should be granted, more particularly, when it is barred by limitation. 8. Dismissed.