IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J.
Sukhwinder Singh – Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & Ors. – Respondents
CRM-M NO. 46812 of 2021 (O&M)
Decided On : 04-08-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of the case leading to fir. (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments for quashing the fir. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court’s analysis of evidence. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. legal standards for abetment of suicide. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. order to quash fir. (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT
Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the FIR No.64 dated 24.05.2018, under Section 306 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , registered at Police Station City Raikot, District Ludhiana alongwith all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
2. In the present case, notice of motion was issued by this Court on 09.11.2021 and thereafter an application was filed by the petitioner for placing on record some documents including the supplementary report qua the petitioner under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the application as well notice was issued by this Court. The Registry of this Court has reported that respondent No.4, who is the complainant, has been served. Rather as per the report of the Registry, respondent No.4 has been served both in the main case as well as in the application. The summons have been received by respondent No.4 after fixing signatures. Photocopy of both the aforesaid reports are Marked as 'X' and 'Y', respectively and shall become a part of the present order. Respondent No.4 has not caused appearance despite being served twice. As such, this Court would proceed in the absence of any representation by respondent No.4. The State has already filed reply in the present case.
3. The brief facts of the present case are that an FIR was lodged on the basis of a statement made by Sukhpal Singh-respondent No.4 who is son of Baljinder Singh son of Ajaib Singh. The aforesaid Baljinder Singh, who is the father of the complainant, is the deceased in the present case who committed suicide and thereupon the present FIR was registered under Section 306 IPC. The FIR is based upon suicide note containing the allegations pertaining to the death of the aforesaid Baljinder Singh who was serving as a Head Constable in the police and who killed himself by shooting himself and had also executed a suicide note in this regard which has been appended with the present petition as Annexure P-6. The aforesaid suicide note is reproduced as under:-
Sd/- Baljinder Singh
In English"
4. As per the suicide note, the deceased has stated that he is dying due to harassment by Ajaib Singh s/o late Kahta Singh, Shamsher Singh s/o Ajaib Singh, Sukhwinder Singh s/o Ajaib Singh, Bahadur Singh Fauji s/o late Jarnail Singh, Balraj Singh s/o late Mukhtiar Singh, Harbant Kaur w/o Tejinder Singh, s/o Balhiar Singh, r/o Gobindgarh. In this way, a number of persons have been named in the suicide note. The complainant while lodging the FIR also alleged that his father had said that he is doing suicide by shooting himself due to harassment by Shamsher Singh and Ajaib Singh. The complainant has nowhere stated the name of the present petitioner, although his name figured in the suicide note.
5. At the time of investigation, the reason for committing of the suicide had co
Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. The State of Maharashtra
Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab
Harbhajan Sandhu v. State of Punjab
Mukesh Kher v. State of Haryana
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a proximate and live link between alleged instigation or illegal acts and the subsequent suicide, the absence of mens rea and po....
To establish abetment of suicide, there must be a direct and intentional act by the accused that leads to the suicide, which was not present in this case.
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.
Abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC requires direct incitement or actions leading to suicide; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient.
The judgment emphasizes the requirement of a proximate link between the alleged acts of the accused and the suicide by the deceased, as well as the need for clear mens rea to commit the offence under....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for the offence of abetment under Section 306 of the IPC, there must be a clear mens rea and an active or direct act leading the deceased to c....
For abetment of suicide under IPC Section 306, clear and proximate evidence of instigation or aid from the accused is essential; mere allegations in a civil dispute are insufficient.
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or intent; mere allegations linked to civil disputes do not meet this threshold.
Non-payment of dues alone does not constitute abetment of suicide under IPC without clear evidence of instigation or overt acts by the accused.
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.