IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. Babu, J.
Sunil Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Sub Inspector Of Police, Tanur Police Station, Through Public Prosecutor And Ors. – Respondents
CRL.MC NO. 690 of 2020
Decided On : 24-08-2023
Abetment of suicide is governed by Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Abetment is defined in Section 107 of IPC, which includes instigation, engagement in conspiracy, and intentional aid. The court referred to the definition of suicide and the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 306 IPC. It also considered precedents that emphasized the need for a clear mens rea and a direct act of instigation or aid to sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC. The court invoked its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
Aparna, a student, committed suicide by placing herself under a train. The petitioner, who was in a relationship with Aparna, was accused of abetting the suicide. The petitioner argued that there was no evidence to support the offence under Section 306 of IPC. The prosecution contended that the petitioner's actions led to Aparna's suicide. The court analyzed the ingredients of abetment and instigation, and concluded that there was no prima facie case against the petitioner. The court invoked its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court examined the definition of suicide, the concept of instigation, and the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 306 IPC. It referred to precedents that emphasized the need for a clear mens rea and a direct act of instigation or aid to sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC. The court also considered the principles laid down in Ude Singh v. State of Haryana and Mariano Anto Bruno v. State. It concluded that there was no evidence of instigation or abetment by the petitioner, and therefore, no prima facie case against the petitioner was made out.
Ratio Decidendi: To convict a person under Section 306 IPC, there must be evidence of instigation or abetment to commit suicide. Mere allegations of harassment or a strained relationship are not sufficient. The accused must have played an active role by instigating or aiding the commission of suicide. The act of the accused must have a positive effect in driving the victim to commit suicide. Without a clear mens rea and a direct act of instigation or aid, conviction under Section 306 IPC cannot be sustained.
Result: The court quashed the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, as there was no prima facie case against the petitioner to implicate him in a crime under Section 306 IPC.
ORDER :
Aparna, a student of S.N College, Shornur was found dead in a railway track at Nadakkavu near Tanur in Malappuram district.
2. Tanur Police registered Crime No.336/2017 under the caption 174 Cr.P.C. Later, the Police converted the FIR as provided in Section 154 Cr.P.C alleging offence under Section 306 of IPC against the petitioner based on the First Information Statement given by the father of Aparna.
3. The Police completed the investigation and submitted the final report before the jurisdictional Magistrate.
4. Heard Sri.Johnson Gomez, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.R.Sreehari, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are no ingredients to attract the offence under Section 306 IPC. It is submitted that continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would be an abuse of the process of the Court.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor contended that the allegations in the final report along with the material produced by the prosecution prima facie show that the petitioner had abetted the commission of suicide by Aparna and, therefore, the proceedings against the petitioner cannot be quashed at this stage invoking powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
7. The crux of the prosecution allegations is as follows:
8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioner in the final report do not make out the ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.
9. Section 306 of IPC reads thus:
10. Abetment is defined in Section 107 of IPC, which is extracted below:
First.-Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly.-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; or
Thirdly.-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 Cis not Z, wilfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here Babets 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 facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.”
11. The Code does not define the word ‘suicide'. ‘Suicide' reflects a “species of fear”. It implies an
Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh
To convict a person under Section 306 IPC, there must be evidence of instigation or abetment to commit suicide. Mere allegations of harassment or a strained relationship are not sufficient. The accus....
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of the accused's intention to instigate the suicide, which was absent in this case.
The ingredients for abetment under Section 306 IPC must be clearly established; mere abusive words do not suffice.
To establish abetment under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear intent and direct actions by the accused that compel the victim to commit suicide; emotional distress alone is insufficient.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to establish a clear mens rea and active act to push the deceased into a position to commit suicide in cases of....
Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires clear evidence of instigation or abetment, which was not established in this case.
Abetment of suicide requires clear connection between accused's actions and the suicide, with established mens rea of instigation or provocation.
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.