Abetment to suicide under IPC Sections 306 and 498A necessitates proof of instigation or influencing behavior, requiring thorough examination in trial; mere allegations do not suffice.

ORDER :

M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.

The petitioner, sole accused in S.C.No.859 of 2023 pending before the XLV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru arising out of crime in Crime No.47 of 2023 registered for offences under Sections 498A, 306 and 34 of the IPC is before this Court calling in question the entire proceedings.

2. Sans details, facts germane are as follows:-

The 2nd respondent is the complainant, father-in-law of the petitioner. The petitioner gets married to one Piyali Mukherjee (‘the victim’), the daughter of the complainant on 05-02-2021. It appears that the relationship between the two turned completely sore and on several grievances, she commits suicide by hanging herself on 24-02-2023. The 2nd respondent/father then registers a complaint against the husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased for having abetted the suicide of the victim on demand of dowry. The complaint is registered on 26-02-2023 which results in a crime in Crime No.47 of 2023. The police conduct investigation and file a charge sheet. While filing the charge sheet the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased are dropped as nothing was found against them and charge sheet is filed only against the petitioner/husband. The matter is committed to the Court of Sessions where it is registered as S.C.No.859 of 2023. On 23-08-2023 the Court of Sessions directs the matter to be posted for framing of charges. It is at that juncture the petitioner knocks the doors of this Court in the subject petition.

3. Heard Sri Sandesh J. Chouta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri P. Thejesh, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and Smt J. Deepa, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

4. The learned senior counsel Sri Sandesh J.Chouta submits that the victim by herself was suffering from depression. She has shot a video of her suicide, transcript of which clearly indicates that she is blaming none in the family. She further says that no action should be taken against the husband or in-laws as she is committing suicide on such depression. The learned senior counsel would further submit that there is neither goading, instigation nor proximity to the death of the victim. He would contend that the issue in the lis stands completely covered by what this Court has held in David D’souza V. State of Karnataka ,2024 SCC OnLine Kar.47. The learned senior counsel submits that this Court in David D’Souza’s case has considered the entire spectrum of the law and, therefore, he would not rely on any other judgment qua the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC. Insofar as the offence under Section 498A of the IPC is concerned, the learned senior counsel would submit that there is not even a single ingredient of demand of dowry in the complaint, except harassment now and then, as noted by the victim in her diary. Insofar as Section 498A is concerned, the learned senior counsel would place reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Achin Gupta V. State of Haryana ,2024 SCC OnLine SC 759. He would seek quashment of the proceedings placing reliance upon the aforesaid two judgments and on emphasizing the fact that the petitioner/husband has never instigated the victim to commit suicide.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel Smt. J. Deepa appearing for the 2nd respondent/complainant would take this Court through the documents appended by the petitioner himself to the petition which are all charge sheet materials to contend that instigation, goading and a