Bombay High Court: In a case wherein, an application was filed seeking to quash FIR registered for the offence punishable under Section 309 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) against applicant for attempting to commit suicide, the Division Bench of Vinay Joshi* and Vrushali V. Joshi, JJ., opined that the act of applicant taking knife and causing injury to herself was an instance of committing the act under mental stress and thus, held that in view of Section 115(1) of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 (‘the 2017 Act’) which had an overriding effect on Section 309 of IPC, applicant could not be tried for the offence of Section 309 of IPC.
Background
In the present case, on 23-03-2022, while the personal informant of the police was in the police station, he noticed that applicant, who was serving as a police constable, came and inquired about one of the married fellow colleague (‘the colleague’) and on being informed that he was on long leave of one month, applicant blamed all the Police, and then took a knife, and caused injury at her wrist and thus, tried to commit suicide.
Counsel for applicant submitted that applicant was having a love affair with the colleague and since the colleague never responded, applicant under frustration and stress, she attempted to commit suicide and thus, in view of Section 115 of the 2017 Act, she could not be tried and punished for the offence under Section 309 of IPC.
The police carried on the investigation basis on the report lodged by the personal informant, and during the investigation, the statement of the colleague was recorded, wherein he stated that he got married long back with another lady, but love relationship was developed with applicant and since his wife resisted for the affair, he detached himself from applicant, switched off his mobile, and went to his native place.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court took note of the fact that applicant had a love affair with the colleague, but as she was unable to contact him, she caused a serious injury to her hand.
The Court observed that the 2017 Act had taken care about the offence of attempted suicide punishable under Section 309 of IPC and it provided that by the nature of the act itself, such person shall be presumed to be under stress and therefore, he/she shall not be tried and punished. The act of causing injury perhaps life injury to himself/herself was considered to be an act committed under stress and therefore, he/she had been excluded from the penal consequence unless proved otherwise. Thus, the Court opined that the presumption was in favour of applicant-accused and the contrary was to be proved by the prosecution.
The Court referred to Section 115 of the 2017 Act and opined that it was apparent that the person who tried to commit suicide, enjoyed a statutory presumption about mental stress and having regard to such presumption, was excluded from being put on trial.
The Court noted that though it was submitted that during trial the presumption could be lifted, however, the Court opined that the statute itself precluded putting the said person on trial. The Court stated that from the material available, it could not be said that applicant was normal and not under stress and thus causing injury to herself was an instance of committing the act under mental stress.
The Court held that in view of Section 115(1) of the 2017 Act which had an overriding effect on Section 309 of IPC, applicant could not be tried for the offence of Section 309 of IPC. The Court thus allowed the application and quashed the FIR registered for the offence punishable under Section 309 of IPC.
[Shital Dinkar Bhagat v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 2765, decided on 05-08-2024]
*Judgment authored by: Justice Vinay Joshi
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Applicant: P.S. Patil, Advocate
For the Non-Applicant: A. Madiwale, Addl. Public Prosecutor
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
