Back
JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Sunil Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Jasjit Singh Bedi, J.:- This order shall dispose of two petitions bearing No.CRM-M 62885-2023 titled as Sunil Chauhan Versus State of Haryana & another and CRM-M-583-2024 titled as Mubin Khan Versus State of Haryana & another as the same are arising out of the same FIR. However, for the sake of convenience the facts have been taken from CRM-M-62885-2023.
2. The prayer in the present petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No.357 dated 15.07.2023 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 306 and 34 IPC at Police Station Adarsh Nagar, District Faridabad and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
3. The aforementioned FIR was got registered at the instance of the complainant-Shiv Kumar (respondent No.2) son of Chandrapal with the allegations that he and his brother Kehri Singh (deceased) were doing the work of building construction in the house of Sunil Chauhan (petitioner in CRM-M-62885-2023). He refused to make payment to them stating that the payments would be made only when the construction work was completed. Rs.4,00,000/- was due to them (complainant party) for the work done. Sunil Chauhan had introduced them (complainant party) to his friend
Non-payment of dues alone does not constitute abetment of suicide under IPC without clear evidence of instigation or overt acts by the accused.
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.
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 under IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or intent to drive the deceased to suicide; mere harassment is insufficient.
For liability under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or active involvement in the suicide, which was absent in this case.
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.
For a charge under Section 306 IPC, clear evidence of instigation or aiding in suicide is required; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient.
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or aid by the accused, which is proximate to the act of suicide.
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
