Bombay High Court

Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of Sunil B. Shukre and G.A. Sanap, JJ. allowed an application quashing an FIR registered for the offences under Section 306, 34 Penal Code.

The FIR disclosed that Pawan (the deceased) was married to accused 3 and even though the marriage was not dissolved, he indulged in extra marital affair and established relations with the Applicant (accused 4). The Applicant was unmarried and, therefore, she started insisting upon the deceased to marry her but, he was in no position to oblige the Applicant as his marriage with accused 3 was subsisting. After failure of her effort to win over the mind of deceased in marrying her, she performed marriage with another person which gave a severe blow to the deceased and that he lost his mental balance.

The Court after considering the facts found that no blame whatsoever can be placed upon the shoulders of this Applicant and in any case, the act of marrying another man by this Applicant at a time when she had extra marital affair with Pawan could not be considered, by no stretch of imagination, to be something like abetment to commit suicide by the deceased Pawan.

The Court discussed the term ‘abetment’ and the Supreme Court case of Kanchan Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2021 SCC Online SC 737 where it was held that in order to proceed against any person for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, there must be present an active act or direct act of such a nature as would lead the deceased to commit suicide. The Supreme Court had further observed that offence of abetment of suicide requires presence of extreme and compelling circumstances and the act alleged against the accused must be seen to be committed by the accused with intention to push the deceased into desperate situation leading to commission of suicide.

The Court was of the opinion that only fault on the part of this Applicant was of engaging herself in an affair with a married person like deceased Pawan and further fault on her part was of she marrying another man while her affair with deceased Pawan, a married man, was on and that too when deceased Pawan did not agree to the suggestion of this Applicant to perform marriage with her.

The Court while allowing the application found that this was a fit case for making of interference in the investigation or otherwise there would be a miscarriage of justice drawing support from guideline Nos.(iii) and (x) laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, 2021 SCC Online SC 315.

[Monika v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Application (APL) No. 686 of 2021, decided on 06-06-2022]


Mr S.S. Doiphode, Addl.P.P. for Non-applicant 1

Mr Sagar Thakkar, Advocate h/f Mr A.J. Thakkar, Advocate for Non-applicant 2

Keywords: suicide, abetment, quashing of FIR

*Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.