Back
NAVNEET KUMAR
M. Nalini Naire @ Nalini Nair – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NAVNEET KUMAR, J.
Heard learned counsel Mahesh Kumar Sinha (2) appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Special P.P. Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal appearing on behalf of the State.
2. At the outset, it appears that the opposite party No.2, Poonam Kumari, who is the informant in the present case, choose not to appear in this case, even after the substituted service of notice, i.e. the paper publication, as evident from the previous order passed by this court in this case, particularly, the order passed on 19-12-2023, where it is found that the last indulgence was given to the opposite party No. 2 by way of last chance to appear in this case, but despite the order dated 19-12-2023, the informant-opposite party No. 2 did not appear in this case.
3. This Criminal Revision is directed against the order dated 18-09-2019 passed by the court of learned Additional Session Judge-XI, Dhanbad in S.T. No.123 of 2019, arising out of Gomia G.R.P.S. Case No.06 of 2008, corresponding to G.R. No.69 of 2008 dated 24-07-2008 registered under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby and whereunder, the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner for discharge under Section 227 of Cr.
The court established that mere allegations of humiliation without concrete evidence do not suffice to constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC; instigation or intentional aid must....
In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any posi....
The assessment of materials at the stage of consideration of charge is different from the appreciation of evidence at the trial stage, and the court must form an opinion based on the available materi....
The court held that mere allegations of harassment do not establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC without direct evidence of instigation or encouragement.
To establish abetment of suicide, there must be a clear link between the accused's actions and the suicide, with evidence of intent to instigate or aid the act.
Mens rea must be evident for abetment of suicide under IPC; mere disciplinary actions do not constitute instigation without specific intent or severe psychological harassment.
(1) Abetment of suicide – Act of death must be committed by deceased himself, irrespective of means adopted by him in achieving object of killing himself.(2) Disciplinary measures adopted by a teache....
In cases of abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of instigation or incitement to commit suicide. Mere allegations of harassment without a positive act proximate to the ....
To establish abetment of suicide under IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or intent to drive the deceased to suicide; mere harassment is insufficient.
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
