SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
Ms. Sushmita Lalchand Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Revision Application No. 278 of 2024
Decided On : 26-11-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Anjani Kumar Singh, Shilpa Prashant Gaikwad
For the Respondent: Sangita Phad

For a charge under Section 306 IPC, clear evidence of instigation or encouragement to commit suicide is required, which was absent in this case.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 306 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 397 and 401 - Discharge application rejected by Trial Court for abetment of suicide - No prima facie evidence of instigation or harassment by Applicant found - Whatsapp conversations indicate deceased sought comfort from Applicant, not threats - FIR filed 23 days post-incident lacks corroborative evidence - No suicide note found. (Paras 1, 2.1, 3.7, 9, 30, 34)

(B) Abetment of Suicide - Essential ingredients of abetment under Section 107 IPC must be established - Mere allegations without evidence insufficient for charge - Emotional distress of deceased attributed to personal circumstances, not Applicant's actions. (Paras 12, 22, 32)

Facts of the case:
The Applicant, accused of abetting the suicide of the deceased, was involved in an extramarital relationship with him. The deceased committed suicide on 27.02.2021, and the FIR was lodged by his wife 23 days later, alleging harassment and threats from the Applicant. No suicide note was found, and the evidence presented was primarily based on whatsapp conversations.

Findings of Court:
The court found no prima facie evidence of abetment, as the whatsapp chats indicated the deceased sought comfort from the Applicant rather than being instigated to commit suicide. The allegations in the FIR were deemed vague and unsupported by evidence.

Issues: The main issues were whether the Applicant's actions constituted abetment of suicide and whether the evidence presented was sufficient to sustain the charge.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that for a charge under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or encouragement to commit suicide, which was absent in this case. The emotional state of the deceased was attributed to his personal circumstances rather than the Applicant's conduct.

Result: Criminal Revision Application allowed; Applicant discharged from the Session Case No. 88 of 2022.

JUDGMENT :

MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

1. Revision Applicant is challenging the order dated 24.04.2024 passed below Exhibit “12” in Session Case No. 88 of 2022 by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Panvel-Raigad (for short “Trial Court”). Applicant is the accused. Trial Court has rejected the discharge Application of Applicant seeking discharge from the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”). Hence, the present Criminal Revision Application (for short “CRA”) under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short “Cr.PC”).

2. Before I advert to the submissions made by the learned Advocates, the following facts of the case are summarised for consideration:

    2.1. Applicant and deceased became acquainted with each other for the first time in the year 2018 and subsequently developed affection. Applicant was unknown of the fact that deceased was married. Deceased committed suicide on 27.02.2021 by hanging. He was 28 years old then. At that time, Applicant was 21 years old. Deceased married first informant/complainant-his wife on 11.05.2013 and they were blessed with a girl child called Jeevika in the year 2019. First Information Report (for short “FIR”) was lodged by wife on 22.03.2021. Applicant is accused of abetment to commit suicide by deceased and is charged under Section 306 IPC.

    2.2. Applicant and deceased met on social media (Instagram) sometime in June, 2018 and their friendship blossomed into an extra-marital affair. Due to the changed behaviour of deceased which his wife discovered sometime in August, 2018. She also informed the family members when she learnt about the same.

    2.3. In February 2019, his wife alongwith her father-in-law, mother-in-law, and one of his friends visited the house of Applicant and informed her and her family about their marriage and child. As per prosecution case, from February 2019 to December 2020, Applicant did not keep any contact with deceased.

    2.4. In December, 2020 deceased contacted Applicant by meeting her below her office and attempted to reconcile with her which was once again discovered by his wife.

    2.5. According to the first-informant, on 26.01.2021, deceased returned back from Goa trip and informed her that Applicant was insisting on marriage and asked him to leave his wife and daughter and threatened to publicly share their private photographs and videos if he failed to do so. On 21.02.2021, informant-wife left for Jodhpur to attend a family function.

    2.6. On 27.02.2021, deceased committed suicide at 01:30 p.m. by hanging to the ceiling fan in his bedroom in his house at Panvel. His cook discovered deceased hanging from the ceiling fan and with the help of his mother and manager took him to Gune Hospital, Panvel, where he was declared brought dead. No suicide note is found. Post mortem report record no signs of injuries on the body of deceased. Cause of death is noted to be ‘due to hanging’.

    2.7. On the same day at around 03:00 p.m. his wife was informed about deceased’s suicide by her sister-in-law. On 28.02.2021, she returned back from Jodhpur to perform the last rites of deceased.

    2.8. On 22.03.2021, 23 days later, FIR No. 62 of 2021 was lodged by wife of deceased against Applicant for the offence under Section 306 IPC, alleging that her deceased-husband committed suicide due to harassment and mental torture by Applicant’s constant pressure to marry her and provide money to her.

    2.9. It is alleged in the FIR that the deceased took 15 tola gold ornaments from the first informant which he pledged with Federal Bank against which he received a gold loan of Rs.3,75,000/- which was paid to Applicant. It is further alleged that deceased took multiple loans on his credit cards and paid the said money to Applicant due to Applicant’s threat to publicly share their private photographs and videos, if he failed to marry her. It is alleged that on the date of incident Applicant made multiple phone calls to deceased after the suicide and

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      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

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top