Mumbai: A “direct influence or oblique impact” of an accused’s words on a person’s mind are not sufficient to constitute an offence of abetment to suicide, Bombay HC held recently. It noted that the “instigation” has to be proximate to the time of suicide, with the accused having an intention to abet it.
While quashing a case against eight members of a Nashik family, including an 85-year-old woman, HC said the impulse or ill-fated thoughts of suicide, however unfortunate they may be, cannot fray the fabric of the provision contained in Section 306 (abetment to suicide) of the Indian Penal Code.”It is not what the suicide deceased ‘felt’ but what the accused ‘intended by his act’, which is more important while dealing with Section 306 of the IPC,” a bench of Justices A S Chandurkar and Jitendra Jain held in its March 27 judgment.
Observing that the “intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for an offence under Section 306 of the IPC”, and noting its absence based on averments in the FIR and the case record so far, the court held that in the interest of justice, the case needs to be quashed to prevent an abuse of the legal process.
“Without knowledge or intention, there cannot be any abetment. The knowledge and intention must relate to the act said to be abetted, which, in this case, is the act of committing suicide. Therefore, in order to constitute ‘abetment by instigation’, there must be direct incitement to do the culpable act,” said the court.
There were three petitions seeking the quashing of an FIR filed in Feb 2020. The FIR, filed following a complaint by a woman’s brother, had accused her husband as well as his father, grandmother, sister and brother-in-law of abetting her suicide and of inflicting cruelty on her. The brother alleged cruelty by the woman’s in-laws two months into her marriage in 2004, then again in 2006, and eight days before she died by suicide by jumping into a well near the matrimonial house while the family sat in the living room.
Those accused of abetting the suicide said the harassment allegations were general in nature, with nothing specific to prove that cruelty was inflicted on her or that she was instigated into dying by suicide. The prosecution argued otherwise.
But on analysing the case record, HC said a perusal of the FIR showed that the offence invoked could not attracted in this case and, hence, under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (which preserves the inherent powers of high courts), it could exercise its jurisdiction to quash the criminal case and the proceedings against the accused.
While quashing a case against eight members of a Nashik family, including an 85-year-old woman, HC said the impulse or ill-fated thoughts of suicide, however unfortunate they may be, cannot fray the fabric of the provision contained in Section 306 (abetment to suicide) of the Indian Penal Code.”It is not what the suicide deceased ‘felt’ but what the accused ‘intended by his act’, which is more important while dealing with Section 306 of the IPC,” a bench of Justices A S Chandurkar and Jitendra Jain held in its March 27 judgment.
Observing that the “intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for an offence under Section 306 of the IPC”, and noting its absence based on averments in the FIR and the case record so far, the court held that in the interest of justice, the case needs to be quashed to prevent an abuse of the legal process.
“Without knowledge or intention, there cannot be any abetment. The knowledge and intention must relate to the act said to be abetted, which, in this case, is the act of committing suicide. Therefore, in order to constitute ‘abetment by instigation’, there must be direct incitement to do the culpable act,” said the court.
There were three petitions seeking the quashing of an FIR filed in Feb 2020. The FIR, filed following a complaint by a woman’s brother, had accused her husband as well as his father, grandmother, sister and brother-in-law of abetting her suicide and of inflicting cruelty on her. The brother alleged cruelty by the woman’s in-laws two months into her marriage in 2004, then again in 2006, and eight days before she died by suicide by jumping into a well near the matrimonial house while the family sat in the living room.
Those accused of abetting the suicide said the harassment allegations were general in nature, with nothing specific to prove that cruelty was inflicted on her or that she was instigated into dying by suicide. The prosecution argued otherwise.
But on analysing the case record, HC said a perusal of the FIR showed that the offence invoked could not attracted in this case and, hence, under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (which preserves the inherent powers of high courts), it could exercise its jurisdiction to quash the criminal case and the proceedings against the accused.