Supreme Court: The Division Bench of M.R. Shah and Aniruddha Bose, JJ., while addressing a matter noted that,
Abetment by a person is when a person instigates another to do something. Instigation can be inferred where the accused had, by his acts or omission created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide.
Aggrieved with the Madras High Court’s decision by which the Court had dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant and confirmed the trial court’s decision convicting the accused of the offence under Section 306 Penal Code, 1860, appellant approached the Supreme Court.
Appellant was married to the deceased 25 years prior to the occurrence. On the day of occurrence, there was some quarrel between the deceased–wife of the appellant. Thereafter both the appellant and the deceased consumed pesticide.
However, the appellant survived but his wife died.
A complaint was filed against the appellant stating that he was having intimacy with the other woman and therefore the couple used to quarrel.
It was alleged against the accused that he had committed the offence under Section 306 IPC and on the conclusion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the appellant accused of the offence under Section 306 IPC.
High Court had confirmed the conviction for the offence under Section 306 IPC.
Analysis, Law and Decision
Appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 306 IPC.
Allegation that the appellant-accused was having an illicit relationship with another woman was not established and proved by the prosecution.
In light of the facts and circumstances of the case, Bench considered whether can it be said that the appellant accused had committed an offence under Section 306 IPC for which he had been convicted?
Abetment of Suicide
“…in a case where if any person instigates other person to commit suicide and as a result of such instigation the other person commits suicide, the person causing the instigation is liable to be punished for the offence under Section 306 IPC for abetting the commission of suicide.”
In view of the above, to bring a case within the provision of Section 306 IPC, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigating or by doing a certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide.
In the Supreme Court decision of Amalendu Pal v. State of West Bengal, (2010) 1 SCC 707, it was observed that mere harassment without any positive action on the part of the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to the suicide would not amount to an offence under Section 306 IPC.
In the present matter, no material was recorded that indicated abetment or appellant’s active role to instigate the deceased to facilitate the commission of suicide. On the contrary, in the instant case, the appellant himself tried to commit suicide and consumed pesticide.
Hence, in Court’s opinion, both the High Court and Trial Court committed an error in convicting the accused for the offence under Section 306 IPC.
Therefore, in view of the above discussion, the present appeal succeeded and the appellant was released on bail. [Velladurai v. State, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 715, decided on 14-09-2021]