Abetment of suicide requires proof of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding or incitement.

Headnote:
ABETMENT OF SUICIDE - SECTION 306 IPC - NO INSTIGATION, CONSPIRACY, OR INTENTIONAL AIDING OR INCITEMENT
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was charged with abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC for allegedly accompanying the main accused to the victim's house, where the main accused had consensual sex with the victim and was caught by her parents, leading to her suicide. The petitioner's role was similar to that of another accused whose proceedings had been quashed by the High Court.
Finding of the Court:

The High Court held that there was no evidence of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding or incitement by the petitioner, and that the victim's suicide was a result of her parents discovering the main accused in her bedroom at midnight.
Issues: Whether the petitioner's actions constituted abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: To constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be proof of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding or incitement to the commission of suicide. In this case, there was no such evidence against the petitioner.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings against the petitioner in the trial court.

ORDER

Petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.189 of 2017 of Nedumudi Police Station, Alappuzha District, which is now pending as SC No.689 of 2018 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court-III, Alappuzha. The petitioner faces prosecution for having committed the offences under Sections 306 and 451 of the Indian Penal Code. The 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant.

2. The circumstances which led to registration of the crime and filing of the final report are as follows:

“The 1st accused in the case was stated to be in love with the deceased Anju. They were studying together for B.Tech at K.R.Gouriyamma College, Thuravoor. The petitioner and the 2nd accused are stated to be friends of the 1st accused. The allegation is that the 1st accused along with the 2nd and 3rd accused reached the house of the deceased on 12.03.2017 at 3.30 a.m. in the morning and the 1st accused entered the bedroom of the deceased and had sexual intercourse with her and while he was coming out of the bedroom, the parents of the deceased caught him and immediately thereafter the deceased locked the bedroom and committed suicide by hanging. According to the prosecution, the 1st accused has committed the offence punishable under Sections 306 and 451 of the Indian Penal Code and the 2nd and 3rd accused have abetted the offence.”

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the 2nd accused had approached this Court and filed Crl.M.C.No.4858 of 2018 seeking to quash the proceedings against him. It is submitted that this Court by judgment dated 24.08.2022 had quashed the proceedings against the 2nd accused. It is submitted that since the role ascribed to the petitioner/3rd accused is no different from the role ascribed to the 2nd accused. The proceedings against the petitioner are also liable to be quashed.

4. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor does not dispute the fact that the proceedings against the 2nd accused have been quashed by this Court by Annexure-A3 judgment. Learned Public Prosecutor also does not dispute that the allegation against the petitioner/3rd accused is not different from the allegations against the 2nd accused at whose instance the proceedings were quashed as against him.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor and having perused Annexure A3 judgment, I am of the view that the petitioner is also entitled to succeed. This Court, while considering the case of the 2nd accused, held as follows:

“5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even if the entire prosecution evidence is believed in toto, no offence under Sections 306 and 451 of the IPC have been made out against the petitioner.

6. As stated already, the accused No. 1 and the deceased were college mates and they were in love. The accused 2 and 3 are the friends of the accused No.1. Even according to the prosecution version, on the date of the incident, the 1st accused along with the remaining accused went to the house of the victim at the midnight and the 1st accused with victim had voluntary sexual intercourse and while the 1st accused was coming out of the bedroom, he was caught red handed by the parents of the victim. Even according to the prosecution, there was absolutely no connection or relationship between the petitioner and the victim. There is no case that the petitioner entered into the compound of the house of the victim. It appears that the petitioner and the 3rd accused were arrayed as accused on the confession made by the accused No. 1 that he was accompanied by them.

7. It is settled that to constitute an offence of abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC, there must be proof of either any instigation or conspiracy or intentionally aiding or direct or indirect act of incitement to the commission of the offence of suicide [see Sukumaran and another V. State of Kerala (2022 (1) KHC 427]. There is absolutely no allegation in th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document