Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
JYOTSNA SHARMA, J.
Om Prakash @ Prakash And Another – Appellant
Versus
The State Of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.107 of 2000
Decided on : 06-09-2023
Abetment - Suicide - Section 306 IPC - [306 IPC] - The court discussed the scope of section 306 IPC and the essential ingredients of the offence under this section. It highlighted the requirement of proximity between the act of suicide and the acts or conduct of the accused, emphasizing the need for clear mens rea and direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. The court referred to relevant Supreme Court judgments to interpret the legal provisions and emphasized the importance of examining the facts and circumstances of each case to establish abetment of suicide.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that the accused instigated the commission of suicide by the deceased. The court examined various reports and witness testimonies to evaluate the prosecution's case. It noted inconsistencies in the reports and lack of evidence to prove proximity between the act of suicide and the accused's conduct. The court highlighted the gradual development of the prosecution's story and the absence of immediate provocation from the accused before the deceased's suicide.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove any proximity between the act of suicide and the accused's conduct. It concluded that the prosecution did not establish that the deceased was maltreated or harassed to the extent that would fall within the term of 'instigation' to commit suicide. As a result, the accused persons were acquitted.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the alleged abetment of suicide under section 306 IPC, the requirement of proximity between the act of suicide and the accused's conduct, and the evaluation of evidence to establish instigation to commit suicide.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for clear mens rea and direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide to establish abetment under section 306 IPC. It highlighted the importance of examining the facts and circumstances of each case and the absence of immediate provocation from the accused before the deceased's suicide.
Final Decision: The judgment and sentence order against the accused persons were set aside, and they were acquitted. The criminal appeal was allowed, and the court directed the appellant to execute bail bonds before the court concerned.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Sheikh Wali-Uz Zaman, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.
2. This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants-Om Prakash @ Prakash and Naresh @ Ram Naresh challenging the order of conviction and sentence dated 08.02.2000 passed by the VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Hardoi in ST No. 652 of 1995 whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 306 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment of 5 years.
3. A number of legal and factual points have been raised by the appellants which shall be dealt with at appropriate stages in the body of the judgment.
4. Relevant facts in nutshell are as below:-
(i) The first informant Asharfi Lal gave a type written report before the police station concerned with the allegations that his real sister-Ramladaiti was married to Prakash about 7 years ago; she had two daughters from this marriage alliance; the members of her family used to harass her because she was not good looking; the accused persons used to threaten first informant's sister saying that her husband Prakash shall perform second marriage; his sister had disclosed all the facts to the first informant and he counseled his sister and sent her to her matrimonial house again; in the month of 'agahan' when he went for 'vidah' of his sister, the accused persons first refused to send her but when he persisted, they sent her after physically assaulting her. In the morning of 10.07.1995 the first informant's brother in-law (chachera behnoi)-Braj Mohan came and informed him that his sister has hanged herself the previous night; the first informant went to the place of occurrence and found her hanging with a plastic rope; her sister was maltreated and put to misbehavior to such an extent by Prakash and other members of his family that she was compelled to take her life.
(ii) As per prosecution case on the basis of earlier written information dated 10.07.1995 given by the first informant-Asharfi Lal, the inquest on dead body of the deceased was conducted on 10.07.1995 from 1pm onwards and postmortem was conducted on 11.07.1995 at 3.30 pm.
(iii) On the basis of another type written report case crime no. 174 of 1995 under section 306 IPC was registered on 11.08.1995 at 12.30 and investigated upon.
5. The investigating officer proceeded to inspect the site of the occurrence collected the documentary evidence, recorded the oral evidence of the witness and submitted a chargesheet against all the accused persons under section 306 IPC. The case proceeded and the Sessions court framed charges under section 306 IPC against both the accused persons.
6. The prosecution examined PW1-Asharfi Lal (the informant), PW2-Raj Kumar, PW3-Dr S.K. Rastogi, PW4-ASI Dal Bahadur, PW5-Braj Mohan, PW6-Ramkhelawan, PW7-SI Ram Sahai.
7. Following documentary evidence was produced (i) Typed written tehrir dated 11.07.1995 (Exhibit Ka-1), (ii) Typed written tehrir dated 09.08.1995 (Exhibit Ka-2), (iii) Copy of GD dated 11.07.1995 (Exhibit Ka-6), (iv) Chik (Exhibit Ka-5), (v) Copy of GD No. 14 dated 10.07.1995, (vi) Copy of GD No. 32 dated 10.07.1995, (vii) Memo seizure rope (Exhibit Ka-13), (viii) Site Map (Exhibit Ka-14), (ix) Postmortem (Exhibit Ka-4), (x) Inquest (Exhibit Ka-3), (xi) Copy of GD No. 14 dated 10.07.1995 (Exhibit Ka-16), (xii) Chargesheet (Exhibit Ka-15), (xiii) Hand written tehrir of Asharfi Lal dated 10.07.1995 (Exhibit Ka-10).
8. In the statement recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused persons claimed to be innocent and denied having any involvement in the offence. No evidence has been produced in defence.
9. All the accused persons namely, Om Prakash @ Prakash, Naresh @ Ram Naresh, Ram Saran, Roop Rani and Smt. Jaidevi were put to trial. Only two of them were convicted by the trial court who are now before this court in this appeal.
10. Before proceeding to evaluate the evidence given on behalf of the prosecution, it shall be useful to briefly refer to the oral eviden
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of clear mens rea and direct or indirect acts of incitement to establish abetment of suicide under section 306 IPC. The court empha....
For conviction under Sections 306 and 498A, clear evidence of instigation or aiding in suicide is essential; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient.
Abetment of suicide requires clear connection between accused's actions and the suicide, with established mens rea of instigation or provocation.
For a conviction under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or aiding that compels suicide, which was not established in this case.
The judgment emphasizes the requirement of unqualified clarity and conviction in proving the accused's culpability under Section 306 IPC, highlighting the necessity of mens rea and a direct link betw....
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
