SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 18003

HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
J. C. DOSHI, J
GOHIL JYOTIBEN YOGESHBHAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CR.MA/8929/2024



Petitioner Advocates:MR. KISHAN H DAIYA(6929) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or actions directly leading to the suicide, not merely allegations of harassment.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 - Anticipatory bail - Petitioners sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR alleging abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC - Court found that ingredients of Section 306 IPC not satisfied as no direct evidence of instigation was present - Petitioners were permanent residents, cooperative with investigation, and had no antecedents - Court emphasized that mere allegations without proximate actions do not constitute abetment. (Paras 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8)

(B) Abetment of Suicide - Ingredients of Section 306 IPC require clear mens rea and proximate actions leading to suicide - Mere harassment or allegations insufficient for conviction - Each case must be examined on its own facts. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners were accused in a case where the deceased allegedly committed suicide after being harassed regarding a relationship. The FIR lacked specific incidents linking the petitioners to the act of suicide.

Findings of Court:
The court granted anticipatory bail, stating that prima facie case for bail was made out as allegations did not meet the threshold for abetment under Section 306 IPC.

Issues: The main issues were whether the petitioners' actions constituted abetment of suicide and if the FIR established sufficient grounds for arrest.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that without direct evidence of instigation or actions leading to the suicide, the petitioners could not be held liable under Section 306 IPC.

Result: Petitions allowed, anticipatory bail granted under specified conditions.

ORDER

1. By way of the present petitions under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973, the petitioners have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in case of their arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R.No.11210022240673 of 2024 registered with Kapodra Police Station.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that if the FIR is taken at face value; including the video clip which is alleged to have been shoot by the deceased and to be considered as suicide note, none of the ingredients of Section 306 of the IPC is made out. He would submit that deceased was in relationship with one Ms.Jyoti and subsequently circulating her photos on social media and therefore grandparents of Ms.Jyoti told the deceased not to do this thing. He would further submit that no other allegations are coming or establishing from the FIR. He would submit that since the preliminary ingredients of Section 306 of the IPC are not satisfied, petitioners may be released on anticipatory bail.

2.1 He would further submit that petitioners are the permanent residence of Surat City and co-operating with the investigation and no antecedents are reported against them and there are no antecedents against them. He would submit that there is no flight risk if the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail. He would submit that considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the petitioners, the petitioners may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions.

3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. He would submit that out of four accused, two accused have categorically stated in the video itself that they have tortured the deceased and therefore he committed suicide. He would submit that the video which was recorded by deceased–Rahul could be treated as suicide note and therefore since the direct evidence is available from the video which deceased had shoot, prima facie linkage to act of the petitioners with the incident of suicide is established.

As far as two other accused are concerned during the investigation the IO concerned had obtained CDR which shows that they had talked with deceased Rahul on 13/03/2024 and 07/03/2024 respectively so it could be presumed that these two petitioners have been threatening the deceased and thus custodial interrogation of the accused is required and therefore they may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

4. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the papers. The complainant is present before the Court.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at the outset, let refer to the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Mariano Anto Bruno Versus The Inspector Of Police [2022 (14) Scale 671] wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that merely on allegation of harassment without their being any positive action proximate to time of occurrence on part of accused which led or compelled person to commit suicide, ingredients of Section 306 of the IPC is not attracted. Relevant observations are made in paragraph 24 to 26 which reads thus:

    “24. While analyzing the provisions of Section 306 IPC along with the definition of abetment under Section 107 IPC, a two-Judge Bench of this Court in Geo Varghese Vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 873 has observed as under:-
    "13. In our country, while suicide in itself is not an offence as a person committing suicide goes beyond the reach of law but an attempt to suicide is considered to be an offence under Section 309 IPC. The abetment of suicide by anybody is also an offence under Section 306 IPC. It would be relevant to set out Section 306 of the IPC which reads as under :-
    "306. Abetment of suicide. -If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may exten

                Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                1
                2
                3
                4
                5
                6
                7
                8
                9
                10
                11
                SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                supreme today icon
                logo-black

                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

                qr

                Scan Me!

                India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                whatsapp-icon Back to top