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

1989 Supreme(Guj) 35

R.J.SHAH, J.P.DESAI
RAMESHBHAI RANCHHODBHAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: BHARAT C.DAVE, K.H.BAGCHI

J. P. DESAI, J.

( 1 ) SO far as the offence punishable under Sec. 306 I. P. C. is concerned we would like to reproduce Sec. 306 I. P. C. which reads as follows:"if any person commits suicide whoever abets the commission of such suicide shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine". It is established beyond reasonable doubt in the present case that the deceased committed suicide. But what is required further for bringing home the offence under Sec. 306 I. P. C. is to establish abetment on the part of the appellants. Section 107 I. P. C. speaks of abetment Neither Clause First nor Clause Secondly nor Explanation I to Clause Thirdly can be pressed into service in the present case because there is no question of instigation or engaging in any conspiracy or wilful misrepresentation etc. in the present case. At the most reliance can be placed upon Clause Thirdly and Explanation 2 to the said Clause. Clause Thirdly and Explanation 2 of Sec. 107 I. P. C. reads as under:"a person abets the doing of a thing who thirdly: Intentionally aids by any act or illegal omission the doing of that thing. . . . . . . .




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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top