G. S. AHLUWALIA
Sitaram Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
G. S. Ahluwalia, J.
By this common order, W. P. No. 22734/2023 shall also be disposed of. For the sake of convenience, facts of W. P. No. 21097/2023 shall be taken into consideration.
2. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed for quashment of FIR in Crime No. 571/2023 registered at Police Station Prithvipur, District Niwari for offence under sections 306, 294, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code.
3. It is the case of petitioner that he is working as Rural Agriculture Extension Officer. On 16-3-2023 at about 9.30 P.M., the brother of petitioner, namely; Ajay Pratap Yadav with his nephew Ankit Yadav was returning back to his village. They were waylaid by Badam Yadav, Shivam Yadav, Vipin Yadav and Anand Yadav and assaulted him by sharp edged dangerous weapon Farsa and Lohangi. Ajay Pratap Yadav sustained incised wound on his forehead. His brother Ajay Pratap Yadav was immediately referred to the Hospital and FIR in Crime No. 171/2023 was registered at Police Station Prithvipur, District Niwari for offence under sections 324, 323, 294, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that thereafter, offence under section 307 of
Ajay Kumar Das vs. State of Jharkhand
Amalendu Pal @ Jhantu vs. State of W. B.
Amit Kapoor vs. Ramesh Chander
Amit Kapur vs. Ramesh Chander and another
Chitresh Kumar Chopra vs. State (Government of NCT of Delhi)
Gangula Mohan Reddy vs. State of A. P.
Kishori Lal vs. State of M. P.
M. Mohan vs. State represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police
M. N. Ojha vs. Alok Kumar Srivastav
M. Srikanth vs. State of Telangana
Mohd. Akram Siddiqui vs. State of Bihar
Munshiram vs. State of Rajasthan
Praveen Pradhan vs. State of Uttaranchal and another
Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Sangeeta Agrawal vs. State of U. P.
Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar vs. State of M. P.
State of A. P. vs. Gourishetty Mahesh
State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal
State of Orissa vs. Ujjal Kumar Burdhan
State of Tamil Nadu vs. S. Martin and ors.
State of W. B. vs. Orilal Jaiswal and another
Teeja Devi vs. State of Rajasthan
To establish abetment of suicide under IPC, there must be clear intent and overt acts; mere allegations are insufficient.
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or direct causation linked to the act of suicide, which was not present in this case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of mens rea and direct or active instigation for the offence of abetment under Section 306 of the IPC. The judgment also emphasizes....
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....
Single WhatsApp message alleging threats insufficient for prima facie abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC without evidence of instigation, mens rea or proximate act compelling suicide; FIR quas....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that to constitute the offence of abetment of suicide under Sec. 306 of the Indian Penal Code, there must be a clear mens rea and a positive act on....
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 – In order to convict a person for offences under Section 306 IPC, basic and essential ingredients of offence, whether death was suicidal and whether there was abetment and instig....
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.