{"id":302113,"date":"2023-09-22T10:00:43","date_gmt":"2023-09-22T04:30:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=302113"},"modified":"2023-09-30T15:03:00","modified_gmt":"2023-09-30T09:33:00","slug":"quashing-of-abetment-of-suicide-result-miscarriage-of-justice-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-research","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/22\/quashing-of-abetment-of-suicide-result-miscarriage-of-justice-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-research\/","title":{"rendered":"Abetment of Suicide| Quashing would result in miscarriage of justice as prima facie evidence supports trial: Calcutta High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Calcutta High Court:<\/span> While deciding a revision petition seeking the quashing of proceedings for offence of abetment of suicide, a single-judge bench comprising of Shampa Dutt (Paul),*<\/span> J., held that \u201cthere is prima facie materials in this case against the petitioners to go to trial and quashing a case of such a nature will cause miscarriage of justice\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n

Brief Facts<\/p>\n

The instant matter originated from a written complaint made by the complainant to the Inspector\u2014in-Charge, Madhyamgram Police Station. The complaint alleged that the complainant\u2019s minor daughter committed suicide on 13-07-2017.<\/p>\n

The complaint further alleged a love relationship between the complainant and the petitioner. It was claimed that the minor daughter had been subjected to mental and physical torture by the petitioner and his mother, who also demanded money from the complainant.<\/p>\n

After investigation, the police filed a Charge Sheet under Section 306<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (IPC) against the petitioner. The case was transferred to the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Barasat, North 24 Parganas, and charges were framed against the petitioner on 26-09-2019.<\/p>\n

The petitioner preferred the present revision petition seeking the quashing of proceeding under Sections 306<\/a> and 34<\/a> of the IPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Whether the charge of abetment under Section 306<\/a> of the IPC<\/a> can be sustained based on the material on record?<\/li>\n
  2. \n

    Whether the written complaint and the materials collected during the investigation establish a case against the petitioner for the alleged offenses?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Parties\u2019 Contentions<\/p>\n

    The petitioner contented that the charge was improperly framed as the material on record did not support the charges under Section 306<\/a> of the IPC<\/a>. It was contended that even if the allegations in the written complaint were accepted as true, they did not establish a case against the petitioner. It was also argued that there was no evidence of abetment by the petitioner in the victim\u2019s suicide.<\/p>\n

    The Prosecution contended that there were sufficient materials on record to support the charges, and given the serious nature of the offense, the case should proceed to trial.<\/p>\n

    Court\u2019s Assessment<\/p>\n

    The court referred to the materials on record, including the case diary, and noted the following:<\/p>\n