Abetment of suicide requires clear connection between accused's actions and the suicide, with established mens rea of instigation or provocation.

Judgment :

Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.

1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Shri A.S.Mardikar for applicants, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri N.B.Jawade for non-applicant No.1/State, and learned counsel Mrs.K.E.Meshram appointed for non- applicant No.2/informant. Admit. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present application is preferred by applicants under Section 482 of the CrPC for quashing of FIR in connection with Crime No.155/2023 registered under Section 306 read with 34 of the IPC and consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing chargesheet No.253/2023.

3. Brief facts necessary for disposal of the application are as under:

The crime is registered on the basis of a report lodged by non-applicant No.2 on an allegation that when he had been to village Waghad for some work, he received a phone call from his father. The father of the informant informed him that when he was in his bedroom, he heard a noise at main gate of his house and when he went to see, it revealed to him that applicant No.1 entered into bedroom of the deceased and did not come out and applicant No.2 was also standing outside the house and was abusing in filthy words about the deceased. The applicants were under influence of liquor. On the next day, i.e. 2.3.2023, again, applicants came there and abused the wife of the informant. The father of the informant informed the informant that applicants have humiliated her and, thereafter, she went inside the bedroom, locked the bedroom from inside, and committed suicide by hanging herself. On the basis of the said report, the police have registered the crime against applicants.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for applicants submitted that to attract offence under Section 306 of the IPC , the prosecution has to prima facie establish that there was “abetment” to the deceased to commit suicide. Even accepting the prosecution case as it is, there is no “instigation” or “aid” and, therefore, the offence of “abetment” is not made out. He submitted that there may be a reason to the deceased to commit suicide as her activities came to knowledge of her father-in-law. He submitted that entire statements of witnesses nowhere disclose “instigation”, in the form of “humiliation”, and at the hands of applicants, the deceased has committed suicide. There is nothing on record to show that in what manner, applicants could be said to have “instigated” the deceased that ultimately led her to commit suicide. The law governing of the is well settled. The basic ingredients to constitute offence under of the are, “suicidal death” and “abetment.” of the talks about “abetment of suicide” and states that whoever abets the commission of suicide of another person, he/she shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding ten years and shall also be liable to fine. In order to attract the offence of “abetment”, there must be mens rea. Without knowledge or intention, there cannot be any “abetment”. The knowledge and intention must relate to the act said to be abetted, which in this case are absent and for all above these grounds, the application deserves to be allowed.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State strongly opposed the application and submitted that the statement of the informant as well as other witnesses reveals that there was requisite mens rea and obviously, it is a matter of evidence. He submitted that statements of witnesses itself show that the deceased was humiliated in public, which is sufficient to infer that there was “abetment” at the hands of applican