Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
VIKRAM NATH, PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ.
Jayedeepsinh Pravinsinh Chavda & Ors – Appellants
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 5175 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 7957 of 2024)
Decided On : 10-12-2024
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 306, 498A and 114 [Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Sections 108, 85 and 54] – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 227 [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 250] – Cruelty and abetment of suicide – Refusal to discharge – ‘Cruelty’ simpliciter is not enough to constitute offence, rather it must be done either with intention to cause grave injury or to drive her to commit suicide or with intention to coercing her or her relatives to meet unlawful demands – In present case, deceased has committed suicide after twelve years of marriage – Merely because she did not file any complaint for twelve years does not guarantee that there was no instance of cruelty or harassment – Deceased was subjected to physical as well as mental cruelty by her husband and in-laws – There is also specific instance related to alleged selling of gold ornaments and subsequent cruelty upon demand for return made by deceased – Preliminary analysis, as required during stage of charge-framing, points towards probable commission of offence of cruelty as provided under section 498-A, IPC – Appellants cannot be discharged for offence under Section 498-A, IPC and should be charged with and tried for the same – However, for conviction under Section 306 of IPC, presence of clear mens rea is necessary – Intention to abet the act is essential – Mere harassment, by itself, is not sufficient to find accused guilty of abetting suicide – Element of mens rea cannot simply be presumed or inferred; it must be evident and explicitly discernible – Mere harassment and such issues of selling of gold ornaments between wife and her husband along with in-laws do not appear to create a scenario where she was left with no option other than to end her life – Ingredients of offence under Section 306, IPC are not made out even on a preliminary analysis of material on record – Appellants discharged from charges under Section 306 of IPC, however, charge under Section 498A of IPC upheld and trial under this provision shall proceed against them. (Paras 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 26, 27 and 28)
(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 306 [Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Section 108] – Abetment of suicide – Ingredients – Mere allegations of harassment are insufficient to establish guilt – For conviction, there must be evidence of a positive act by accused, closely linked to time of incident, that compelled or drove victim to commit suicide – It is essential to establish that death was a result of suicide and that accused actively abetted its commission – This can involve instigating victim or engaging in specific actions that facilitated the act – Prosecution must prove beyond doubt that accused played a definitive role in abetment – Without clear evidence of an active role in provoking or assisting suicide, conviction under Section 306 IPC cannot be sustained – Prosecution bears burden of proving this active involvement to hold accused accountable for alleged abetment of suicide – Court examines whether accused’s conduct, including provoking, urging, or tarnishing victim’s self-esteem, created an unbearable situation – If accused's actions were intended only to harass or express anger, they might not meet threshold for abetment or investigation – Each case demands careful evaluation of facts, considering accused’s intent and its impact on victim. (Paras 21, 22, 23 and 24)
Facts of the case:
Present criminal appeal arises from order of Gujarat High Court, dated 09.05.2024, whereby Court rejected Criminal Revision Application filed by appellants herein and refused to discharge appellants-accused from offences punishable under Sections 306, 498A and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Findings of Court:
Ingredients for offence under Section 306, IPC are not made out even on a preliminary analysis of material on record. Therefore, they cannot be charged under Section 306, IPC and deserve to be discharged of the same.
Result : Appeal partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
VIKRAM NATH, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The present criminal appeal arises from an order of the Gujarat High Court, dated 09.05.2024, whereby the Court rejected the Criminal Revision Application No. 536 of 2024 filed by the appellants herein and refused to discharge the appellants – accused from offences punishable under sections 306, 498A and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 18601[IPC].
3. FIR No. 11206038210259 of 2021 dated 18.04.2021 was registered at the instance of the deceased’s father against the appellants herein for offences under sections 306, 498A, 114 of the IPC. It was alleged that the appellant no.1 was married to the deceased – wife in the year 2009. The deceased – wife was residing in the matrimonial house with her in-laws, that is, appellant nos. 2 and 3. For the first five years of the marriage, no child was born to the couple. The deceased – wife was subjected to physical and mental harassment owing to this and thus returned to her parental home. When she returned to her matrimonial home on being convinced by her parents, a son was born to the deceased in the next few years. Around twelve months before the alleged incident, the deceased had informed her father – the informant that the appellant – accused had sold her ornaments, given to her as streedhan during her marriage, and whenever she demanded return of the same, she was physically and mentally harassed. On 18.04.2021, the informant received information that the deceased had committed suicide by hanging herself. It is alleged that it was due to the physical and mental harassment meted out by the appellant –accused that the deceased was compelled to commit suicide.
4. Appellants had earlier sought quashing of the FIR, which petition was dismissed by the High Court and even the Special Leave Petition before this Court against the dismissal order of the High Court was dismissed as withdrawn. The appellants thereafter preferred an application seeking discharge under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732[CrPC] on the ground that, prima facie, the ingredients for the offence of abetment as provided under Section 107 of IPC are not made out against them. As per the complaint the incident had taken place twelve months ago. In the circumstances prima facie instigation is not proved, therefore the offence as per sections 306, 498A, 114 of the IPC are not made out against them. The Sessions Court, vide order dated 28.02.2024, dismissed the discharge application observing that in the circumstances of the case, it did not seem just and proper to discharge or acquit any accused person without recording evidence on all the facts alleged.
5. Appellants challenged the above order before the High Court in a Criminal Revision Petition, wherein the High Court in the impugned order has dismissed the same and held that the appellants failed to bring any material on record to prove that a prima facie case is not made out to frame charges against them. The Court, while dismissing the revision petition, observed that at the stage of charge framing, the Court's role is preliminary and limited to determining whether a prima facie case exists. The test applied is whether the materials presented by the prosecution, taken at its face value, disclose ingredients of the alleged offence. The Court is not required to evaluate the probative value of the evidence or assess its sufficiency for conviction. Instead, it only has to consider whether there is a strong suspicion that the accused might have committed the offence. This suspicion must be based on credible material and not on arbitrary conclusions. In the present case, witness statements revealed that the deceased had faced consistent physical and mental harassment by the accused. The harassment included selling the deceased's gold ornaments, which was her streedhan, and torturing her when she demanded their return. Witnesses also indicated that the harassment intensified before her suicide, particularly during a rec
(1) Abetment of suicide – Mere harassment, by itself, is not sufficient to find accused guilty of abetting suicide – Element of mens rea cannot simply be presumed or inferred; it must be evident and ....
The main legal point established in this judgment is that the appellant's actions constituted cruelty under Section 498A IPC, but there was no evidence to prove abetment under Section 306 IPC.
Section 306 in Indian Penal Code reads as abetment of suicide.
Conviction under sections 498A and 306 requires concrete evidence of cruelty and direct acts of abetment; mere allegations and delays in FIR are insufficient for a successful prosecution.
Abetment of suicide – There has to be clear mens rea to commit offence – Merely on allegation of harassment without their being any positive action proximate to time of occurrence on part of accused ....
To convict for abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or active involvement by the accused, which was not established in this case.
The need for evidence of instigation or abetment to establish the offence under Section 306 IPC and the distinction between Section 498-A and Section 306 IPC as different offences.
Cruelty and abetment of suicide – Mere fact of commission of suicide by itself would not be sufficient for Court to raise presumption under Section 113A of Evidence Act, and to hold accused guilty of....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
