Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
Subhankar Paul - Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr. – Respondents
CRR 417 of 2019
Decided On : 09-05-2024
Quashing - Abetment of Suicide - IPC Section 306 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 306 of the IPC regarding abetment to suicide, emphasizing that mere relationship or prior communication does not suffice for instigation unless clear evidence of incitement is present.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash an FIR under Section 306 IPC, alleging that the victim's suicide was linked to their strained relationship, despite the victim's suicide note stating no one was responsible for her death.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the suicide note and evidence did not establish the petitioner’s instigation or provocation, thus supporting the quashing of the FIR.
Issues: Whether the FIR under Section 306 IPC could be quashed based on the absence of evidence showing instigation or abetment by the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that for an offence under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or abetment, which was lacking in this case.
Result: The FIR under Section 306 IPC is quashed.
JUDGMENT :
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the First Information Report in connection with Ashoknagar Police Station Case No. 485 of 2018 dated 23.07.2018, under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The petitioner states that he was arrayed in the above noted case on the basis of a complaint made by one Dilip Sarkar to the effect that his daughter namely Debolina Sarkar aged about 22 years was found hanging on 22.07.2018 and he suspects that due to strained relationship with the present petitioner, she had committed suicide.
3. The petitioner states that he is no way connected with the said offence, as it has come to his knowledge that the victim left a suicide note by stating that no one was responsible for her death.
4. The petitioner states that there is no question of provocation and instigation on his part.
5. In spite of due service there is no representation on behalf of the opposite party no. 2.
6. The State has placed the case diary.
7. The petitioner has filed a short note of argument.
8. The allegations in the written complaint include the statement that the deceased had a relationship with the accused/petitioner herein.
9. From the case diary, it appears that the deceased left behind a suicide note, holding no one responsible for her death.
10. The handwriting expert’s report supports that the note is in the deceased’s handwriting.
11. The petitioner has relied upon the following Judgments:-
“B. Indian Penal Code, Sections 306 and 107 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482 - Quarrel between accused and husband of his sister - Accused told the deceased to go and die -Deceased committing suicide on third day of quarrel - Cannot be held that and suicide was direct result of quarrel- There was enough time for deceased to think over and reflect - Charge of abetment against accused quashed. 1995 Supp. (3) SCC 438 relied.”
ii) Mohit Singhal & Anr. vs The State of Uttarakhand & Ors., in Criminal Appeal No. 3578 of 2023, decided on December 1, 2023.
“10. In the present case, taking the complaint of the third respondent and the contents of the suicide note as correct, it is impossible to conclude that the appellants instigated the deceased to commit suicide by demanding the payment of the amount borrowed by the third respondent from her husband by using abusive language and by assaulting him by a belt for that purpose. The said incident allegedly happened more than two weeks before the date of suicide. There is no allegation that any act was done by the appellants in the close proximity to the date of suicide. By no stretch of the imagination, the alleged acts of the appellants can amount to instigation to commit suicide. The deceased has blamed the third respondent for landing in trouble due to her bad habits.”
iii) Netai Dutta vs State of West Bengal, in Criminal Appeal No. 359 of 2005 (arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 3254 of 2004), decided on 28.02.2005.
“B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Sections 482 Indian Penal Code, Sections 306 and 107 - Suicide by a worker of company - Suicide note by deceased stated that accused engaged him in several wrong-doings - Suicide note showed that deceased was dissatisfied with working conditions - Deceased remained absent for two years and committed suicide. In suicide note there is no reference which showed that accused committed any willful act or omission or intentionally aided or instigated the deceased in committing suicide - Contents of suicide note do not make out the offence - Prosecution quashed.”
iv) Abhishek vs State of Madhya Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No. 1456 & 1457 of 2015, decided on 31.08.2023.
………… does not relate to a case under Section 306 of IPC.
The case therein is under Section 498A of IPC.
12. The seizure in this case includes whatsapp conversation between
The court established that mere relationship or communication does not constitute abetment to suicide without clear evidence of instigation.
The High Court cannot quash criminal proceedings for serious offences like abetment of suicide based on a settlement, as such crimes impact society and require trial.
(1) Abetment of suicide – Even an indirect act of incitement to commission of suicide would constitute offence of abetment of suicide under Section 306 of IPC.(2) Criminal prosecution, if otherwise j....
The court emphasized that inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings should be exercised sparingly, particularly in serious offences, to prevent abuse of process and ensure justice.
High Court quashed abetment proceedings on victim-husband compromise after main rapist accused died, as conviction remote, parties harmonious, invoking Section 482 CrPC sparingly for non-compoundable....
Offences under Section 307 IPC are serious and heinous, lacking the possibility of being quashed based on private compromise. Hence, societal interest in prosecuting such crimes prevails.
High Court may quash non-compoundable FIRs for rash/negligent driving causing death on genuine compromise by victim family, as offences not heinous, conviction remote, securing ends of justice and pr....
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
