IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD BENCH
VIBHA KANKANWADI, SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.
Ramesh Vinayak Patil & Ors. - Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, Through In-charge of Police Station, Amalner Police Station, Jalgaon & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Application No. 2722 of 2024 With Criminal Application No. 2260 of 2024
Decided On : 07-03-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 306 - Quashing of proceedings in Regular Criminal Case No.196/2023 for abetment of suicide - The court found that the charge sheet did not establish the necessary ingredients of abetment as per Section 306, as there was no proximate act of instigation by the accused. (Paras 1, 11)
(B) Legal Principles - Abetment requires a clear mens rea and a direct act leading to suicide; mere allegations of harassment without proximity do not suffice for conviction. (Paras 5, 7.4)
Facts of the case:
The deceased, Tushar, committed suicide allegedly due to harassment from his employers regarding financial demands. The applicants, directors of the institution, were accused of abetting the suicide. (Paras 3, 4)
Findings of Court:
The court held that the evidence did not support the charge of abetment as there was no direct link between the accused's actions and the suicide. (Paras 10, 11)
Issues: Whether the actions of the accused constituted abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that for a conviction under Section 306, there must be a clear act of instigation or aid leading to the suicide, which was absent in this case. (Paras 5, 11)
Result: Both Criminal Applications allowed; proceedings quashed.
ORDER :
1. Present applications have been filed for quashing the proceedings in Regular Criminal Case No.196/2023 i.e. after committal Sessions Case No.24/2023 pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon, arising out of First Information Report vide Crime No.504/2022 dated 29.10.2022 registered with Police Station, Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon, for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. V.D. Sapkal instructed by learned Advocate Mr. S.R. Sapkal for applicant in Criminal Application No.2722 of 2024, learned Advocate Mr. S.R. Kolhare for applicant in Criminal Application No.2260 of 2024 and learned APP Mrs. Priya R. Bharaswadkar for respondent No.1 as well as learned Advocate Mr. A.V. Hon for respondent No.2 in both applications.
3. The learned Senior Counsel instructed by learned Advocate Mr. S.R. Sapkal in Criminal Application No.2722 of 2024 has submitted that even if we take the entire charge sheet including First Information Report as it is, it will not attract ingredients of offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. First Information Report is lodged by widow of deceased. Deceased Tushar Bhaurao Deore (Patil) was employed with Sarbete School run by Gramvikas Shikshan Sanstha, Mudi. He was appointed on compassionate basis after the orders from this Court in 2013. Applicant Ramesh Vinayak Patil is one of the Directors and applicant Dipak Chandan Patil is the Teacher in the said institution and school respectively. Unfortunately Tushar committed suicide on 11.10.2022 by jumping in front of a railway. The prosecution has come with a case that he has left suicide note of which photograph was found in the mobile of deceased. The original is stated to be then found in the house.
4. Learned Senior Counsel as well as the learned Advocate appearing for Dipak Chandan Patil have taken us through First Information Report as well as the entire charge sheet and they submit that as per contentions in First Information Report, Tushar was transferred within institution on 01.06.2016. It is the say that permanent Directors, Secretary, the other Directors were not allowing Tushar to resume duties and they were demanding amount of Rs.10,00,000/- from him. He was under pressure and tension because of the said demand. In fact, he had taken loan from the Patsanstha under the pressure from accused persons and had given it to them in presence of Tushar’s nephew Darshan Ganesh Patil. Tushar had become financially weak and, therefore, was unable to fulfil the further demand i.e. remaining amount of Rs.8,00,000/-. Tushar was on leave in August and September, 2022, but thereafter whenever he had gone, he was not allowed to resume his duties. Thereafter, the meeting was arranged, which was then attended by Ramesh Patil, Secretary Sunil Patil, In-charge Chairman Panjabrao Patil, Director Jayant Patil, Kamalakar Patil, Dipak Chandan Patil, employee Dinesh Patil, wherein it was demanded that he should give the remaining amount of Rs.8,00,000/- and on that day there was altercation between Tushar and Directors. Since then Tushar was under mental tension and, therefore, he committed suicide. In order to support these contentions the Investigating Officer has recorded statements of witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and collected certain documents from the financial institution. Supplementary statement of informant has also been recorded, however, in her supplementary statement she states that name of Sunil Patil is not mentioned in the suicide note and she has no complaint in respect of In-charge Chairman Punjabrao Patil, Dr. Sharad Shinde and Anil Patil. Due to her mental condition she had wrongly stated their names and she prayed for deletion of names of persons at Sr.Nos.2, 3, 10 and 11. Then there is statement of nephew, who says that his maternal uncle Tushar was under mental tension and he was present when t
For a conviction under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or aid leading to suicide, which was not established in this case.
For a charge of abetment of suicide under IPC Section 306, there must be clear evidence of instigation or incitement by the accused, and mere allegations of harassment are insufficient without a dire....
Abetment of suicide – Necessary ingredients of offence must be fulfilled by prosecution.
A conviction under IPC Section 306 requires clear evidence of intent to instigate suicide, which was not present in this case.
The court held that mere allegations of harassment do not establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC without direct evidence of instigation or encouragement.
For liability under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or active involvement in the suicide, which was absent in this case.
The judgment emphasizes the requirement of a proximate link between the alleged acts of the accused and the suicide by the deceased, as well as the need for clear mens rea to commit the offence under....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.