R. K. ABICHANDANI, J.

( 1 ) THE State has appealed against the judgment and order dated 26-10-1997 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana, acquitting the respondent for the offence under S. 306, read with S. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

( 2 ) THE prosecution case was that the respondents were publishing defamatory articles containing false allegations against Narsinhbhai Chaudhary in connection with the running of a primary school by him. These articles were published in the daily "uttar GUJARAT EXPRESS" of which the respondent No. 2 (who was the original accused No. 2), was the editor. According to the informant who is the son of the deceased Narsinhbhai, these articles were defamatory and threatening and written with a view to take over the possession of the school building. It is also the prosecution case that on 4/08/1994, the respondents had given threats to Narsinhbhai and harassed him, as a result of which on 5/08/1994, in the evening at about 5-00 p. m. , Narsinhbhai who could not bear the harassment meted out to him by the respondents, committed suicide by consuming poison. According to the prosecution, therefore, the respondents had abetted the commission of suicide of Narsinhbhai in furtherance of the common intention of all the respondents.

( 3 ) THE trial Court found that the prosecution had not established that Narsinhbhai had committed suicide because of any instigation or aiding or facilitating commission of suicide. The trial Court observed that the news item, which was produced at Ex. 20. published in the said Newspaper was in form of information and that the trial Court was not concerned with its defamatory nature. It was held that if such news caused any anguish to the deceased and if he committed suicide by reading the said news in the Newspaper, it cannot be said that the news published on 27-6-1994 amounted to abetment of suicide which Narsinhbhai committed on 5-8-1994.

( 4 ) SECTION 306 of the Indian Penal Code reads as under :-"306. Abetment of suicide.- 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. "

( 5 ) THE meaning of the word "abetment" emerges from S. 107, which reads as under :-"107. Abetment of a thing.- A person abets the doing of a thing, who - first.- Instigates any person to do that thing; orsecondly.- Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; orthirdly.- Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. Explanation 1.- A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. ILLUSTRATION a. a public officer, is authorised by a warrant from a Court of Justice to apprehend Z, B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z, wilfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the apprehension of C. Explanation 2.- Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act. "

( 6 ) IN the context of the facts of the present case, where defamatory articles are said to have been published in a daily of which the respondent No. 2 was the editor, one has to examine whether the suicide said to have been committed by Narsinhbhai on reading of the articles published which were defamatory of him would amount to abetment by the respondents to enable Narsinhbhai to commit suicide. In the present case "doing of a thing" is the suicid

Click Here to Read the rest of this document