JUDGMENT : J.C. DOSHI, J. 1. By way of present petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside FIR being I - C.R. No. 35 of 2013 registered with Bopal Police Station, Ahmedabad. 2. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that on bare reading of FIR as well as charge-sheet papers, role is of the petitioner is no where stated. It is submitted that the petitioner is sister in law (Nanad). It is submitted that marriage of the petitioner took place prior to 9 years of marriage of deceased. She is living at Morena, M.P. at her matrimonial home. It is submitted that the allegations in the FIR is name sake. No specific role is attributed to the petitioner to the extent of physical or mental cruelty or asked or demanded four wheeler car or anything else. It is submitted that the petitioner has not played any role in commission of offence and therefore, continuance of proceeding against the petitioner would be abuse of process of law and therefore, it is submitted to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings against the petitioner. 3. On the other hand learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of present application looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. Learned APP after reading charge-sheet papers at page no. 21 would submit that deceased also penned suicide note and made allegations against the petitioner. Therefore, it is submitted to dismiss the petition. 4. Heard learned advocate for the parties. Learned APP failed to point out what is stated in the suicide note as suicide note is not on record and even contents of the suicide note is not stated in the charge-sheet counter. Moreover, taking FIR as it is no whisper of allegations is levelled against the petitioner. She is married and living at Morena, M.P. Only allegations made is that mother-in-law, sister-in-law and brother-in-law as well as husband of deceased have passed threat that if they want to see their daughter alive, then they have to give four wheeler car. Apart from that, there is no allegations levelled in the FIR that deceased was subjected at the hands of the petitioner and she has prompted deceased to commit suicide. No proximity is visible from the FIR as well as counter of charge-sheet. Apart from that, there is no allegations levelled in the FIR that deceased was subjected at the hands of the petitioner and she has prompted deceased to commit suicide. No proximity is visible from the FIR as well as counter of charge-sheet. Therefore, continuance of FIR against the petitioner would be abuse of process of law. 5. At this juncture, I may refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mariano Anto Bruno vs. The Inspector of Police, 2022 (14) Scale 671 , wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held what are necessary ingredients for establishing offence of section 306 of IPC. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held in Para 36 and 38 as under: “36. To convict a person under Section 306 IPC, there has to be clear mens rea to commit offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which leads deceased to commit suicide finding no other option and the act must be such reflecting intention of the accused to push deceased into such a position that he commits suicide. The prosecution has to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased committed suicide and Appellant No. 1 abetted the commission of suicide of the deceased. In the present case, both the elements are absent. 38. This Court has time and again reiterated that before convicting an accused under Section 306 IPC, the Court must scrupulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced before it in order to find out whether cruelty and harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with no other alternative but to put an end to her life. It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without their being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable.” 5.1. In the present case, ingredient of section 306 of ICP are missing. 6. The guidelines has been settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana and Others vs. Bhajanlal and Others, 1992 AIR 604. In the present case, ingredient of section 306 of ICP are missing. 6. The guidelines has been settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana and Others vs. Bhajanlal and Others, 1992 AIR 604. The Hon’ble Apex Court made following observations: “In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Ch. XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which we have extracted and reproduced above, the following categories of cases are given by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formula and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (5) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act. (7) where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala-fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 6.1 Above guidelines apply to the present case. 7. In the result, present Criminal Misc. Application is allowed and FIR being I - C.R. No. 35 of 2013 registered with Bopal Police Station, Ahmedabad as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed and set aside qua the petitioner. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted. 8. Before parting with the order, I may take on record report forwarded by learned Principal District Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) and report forward by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Sanand, Ahmedabad (Rural). In the report forwarded by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Sanand, Ahmedabad (Rural), it is stated as under: “Pursuant to the letter under reference at S. No. 2, the registry of this Court has directed the concerned staff member to verify and make necessary compliance. As reported from the office and upon perusal of the CIS data, the aforesaid FIR culminated in Criminal Case No. 3229 of 2013 which is shown to have been disposed of by order of committal since offence trial was for section 306 of Indian Penal Code. At the relevant point of time, charge of Bopal Police Station was with the then Principal Civil Judge, Sanand in 2013. The staff has made efforts to find out as to whether the record of the committal case in prescribed manner and method is forwarded to the Hon'ble Sessions Court. At the relevant point of time, charge of Bopal Police Station was with the then Principal Civil Judge, Sanand in 2013. The staff has made efforts to find out as to whether the record of the committal case in prescribed manner and method is forwarded to the Hon'ble Sessions Court. However, regretfully, it is kindly to bring to the notice that dispatch register of the Principal Civil Court for the year 2015 and main dispatch register maintained by the registry of the year 2015 is not traceable in the registry and the same appears to have misplaced somewhere with old record. Sincere efforts are being made to find out the dispatch register as to when record of the committal case was forwarded to the Hon'ble Sessions Court or not. But some more time needs for the purpose. Therefore, my Lordship be pleased to grant some time. Inconvenient caused is deeply regretted and Your Lordship may please be gracious to grant some time for the purpose.” 9. Some shocking aspect is coming that dispatch register is missing since the year 2015. No action is taken at the end of learned Principal District Judge for tracing dispatch register or to find out culprit for misplacing such register. In these circumstances, I direct the learned Principal District Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) to conduct preliminary inquiry through any officer for missing of dispatch register and if required to take necessary action as per law.