IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BENCH
G.S. AHLUWALIA, J.
Pradeep Sakhawar – Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. and Another – Respondents
MCRC No. 35848 of 2021
Decided On : 25-02-2022
ABETMENT - Quashment of FIR under Section 306 of IPC - [Section 306 IPC] - The court discussed the legal provisions related to abetment of suicide, emphasizing the need for instigation and intentional aiding in the commission of suicide. The court referred to various Supreme Court judgments to highlight the elements of abetment and the necessity of proving direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. The judgment emphasized that mere delay in recording witness statements or the relationship of witnesses to the deceased cannot be grounds for discarding evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed for quashment of FIR under Section 306 of IPC, stating that the allegations against him were false and that the deceased could have made a complaint to the police instead of committing suicide. The State opposed the application, asserting that the applicant had abetted the deceased to commit suicide.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant had pressured the deceased to have a physical relationship with him, leave her husband, and marry him, and had threatened to defame her in society. The court emphasized that these actions amounted to abetment of suicide.
Issues: The issues revolved around the allegations of abetment of suicide, the credibility of witness statements, and the relationship of witnesses to the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for instigation and intentional aiding in the commission of suicide, as well as the necessity of proving direct or indirect acts of incitement. The judgment highlighted that delay in recording witness statements or the relationship of witnesses to the deceased cannot be grounds for discarding evidence.
Final Decision: The application for quashment of the proceedings was dismissed by the court.
JUDGMENT :
G.S. AHLUWALIA, J.
1. This application under Section 482 of CrPC has been filed for quashment of FIR in Crime No. 281/2021 registered at Police Station Ambah District Morena for offence under Section 306 of IPC.
2. The necessary facts for disposal of present application in short are that the FIR has been lodged against the applicant on the allegations that the applicant was pressurizing the deceased to talk to him even against her wishes and was insisting that the deceased should leave her husband and should marry him and was also insisting for physical relationship. When the deceased refused to accede to the demand of the applicant, then he used to threaten her to defame in the society by disclosing her illicit relationship. It is alleged that on account of threat given by the applicant, deceased committed suicide on 31.03.2021 by hanging.
3. Challenging the FIR, it is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the allegations made against the applicant are false. If the applicant was harassing the deceased, then instead of putting her life to an end, the deceased could have made a complaint to the police. All witnesses are the family members of the deceased. Their statements have been recorded belatedly. In fact, one Malkhan was killed by the family members of the deceased. The applicant is related to Malkhan and since family members of the deceased were convicted for the murder of Malkhan, therefore, he has been falsely implicated. To buttress his contentions, counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Ramsingh Yadav vs. State of M.P. and Another, 2018 (4) Crimes 230 (M.P.).
4. Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the State. It is submitted that the applicant was pressurizing the deceased to leave her husband and marry the applicant and was also insisting that she should allow physical relationship with him and when she refused to accede to his illegal demands, then he also threatened to defame her in the society by disclosing her relationship. Thus, it is clear that the applicant by the aforesaid act, had abeted the deceased to commit suicide.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. The Supreme Court in the case of Chitresh Kumar Chopra vs. State (Government of NCT of Delhi), (2009) 16 SCC 605 has held as under:
17. Thus, to constitute “instigation” a person who instigates another has to provoke, incite, urge or encourage the doing of an act by the other by “goading” or “urging forward.” The dictionary meaning of the word “goad” is “a thing that stimulates someone into action; provoke to action or reaction” (see Concise Oxford English Dictionary); “to keep irritating or annoying somebody until he reacts” (see Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, 7th Edn.).”
7. The Supreme Court in the case of Gangula Mohan Reddy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2010) 1 SCC 750 has held as under:
Amlendu Pal alias Jhantu vs. State of West Bengal
Chitresh Kumar Chopra vs. State (Government of NCT of Delhi)
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear instigation or intentional aid; mere suspicion or threats are insufficient.
Abetment of suicide requires clear connection between accused's actions and the suicide, with established mens rea of instigation or provocation.
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or direct involvement by the accused, and mere relationship discord is insufficient to constitute a....
Continuous harassment and threats can constitute instigation for abetment of suicide under IPC, necessitating careful examination of circumstances surrounding the act.
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....
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.
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.