{"id":334501,"date":"2024-11-06T10:00:20","date_gmt":"2024-11-06T04:30:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=334501"},"modified":"2024-11-08T10:28:39","modified_gmt":"2024-11-08T04:58:39","slug":"delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court| Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> The petitions were filed seeking to quash the order dated 17-09-2014 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate (‘MM’), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi summoning the petitioners in FIR filed under Section 306<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), registered at PS IP Estate. Amit Sharma, J., allowed the present petitions and set aside the summoning order as the allegations did not meet the threshold required to invoke the provisions of Section 306<\/a> IPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The background relates the tragic suicide of a former employee (deceased), who had previously worked at the B.R. Ambedkar College, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi (BRAC), the college where the petitioners’ held positions of authority. After a disciplinary inquiry that concluded with the termination of the deceased’s employment on 13-03-2012, she exhibited signs of distress, reportedly threatening to take her life as noted in a letter dated 02-04-2013, from Proctor of the University of Delhi. This letter was addressed to various authorities, including the DCP of North-East and the SHO of Bhajanpura, indicating that the deceased had expressed suicidal intentions subsequent to her termination. The attempted suicide occurred on 13-09-2013, over a year and a half after her dismissal. The evidence presented indicated no ongoing communication or interaction between the petitioners and the deceased in the period leading up to her suicide.<\/p>\n

The petition was primarily instigated by the deceased’s family’s allegations against the petitioners, who were accused of contributing to her mental distress and subsequent suicide through harassment and misconduct during her employment. It was claimed that prior to her termination, the deceased had lodged a complaint against the second petitioner, alleging inappropriate conduct. However, inquiries conducted by the university and police deemed these allegations to be unsubstantiated. Furthermore, the deceased was involved in a contentious matrimonial dispute with her husband, the second respondent, further complicating the narrative of her state of mind.<\/p>\n

During the proceedings, the Counsel for the respondents asserted a direct link between the petitioners’ actions and the deceased’s attempted suicide, referencing witness statements from two college employees who reported experiencing backlash after supporting the deceased during her employment. They cited memos issued close to the date of the suicide as evidence of the petitioners’ ongoing harassment. However, the Court found these memos insufficient to establish a causal relationship between the petitioners’ conduct and the deceased’s tragic decision, stating that the memos could not be construed as incitement under Section 306<\/a> of the Penal Code<\/a> (IPC).<\/p>\n

The Trial Court’s decision to proceed despite a closure report filed by the investigating officer was scrutinized. The closure report indicated that the investigation had concluded without sufficient evidence to substantiate the claims against the petitioners, a fact that was not duly considered in the magistrate’s decision to rely on the contents of the suicide note and alleged dying declarations of the deceased. The Court underscored the importance of demonstrating the requisite mens rea<\/span>, an intention to incite the suicide on the part of the petitioners, which was notably absent.<\/p>\n

The Court cited precedents establishing that mere harsh decisions made in an official capacity do not amount to incitement unless there is clear evidence of intent to push an individual towards suicide. The judgments referenced indicated that the mere existence of a grudge or complaints regarding a superior’s behavior does not meet the threshold for establishing criminal liability under Section 306<\/a> IPC<\/a>. The Court emphasized that personal grievances against employers or superiors, unless accompanied by unequivocal evidence of intent to instigate suicide, do not warrant criminal proceedings.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court concluded that there was no sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations of abetment of suicide against the petitioners reiterating the principle that the prosecution must demonstrate a clear connection between the petitioners’ actions and the deceased’s state of mind at the time of her suicide, which was lacking in this case. Consequently, the Court held that the FIR should be quashed, recognizing the significant implications of subjecting individuals to criminal prosecution based on tenuous connections or unsubstantiated claims.<\/p>\n

[Dr G K Arora v. State, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 7535<\/a>, decided on 29-10-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

Ms. Richa Kapoor, Mr. Kunal Anand, Mr. Jai Batra, Ms. Saloni Mahajan, Mr. Sandesh Kumar, Ms. Sakshi and Ms. Atika Singh, Advocates for petitioner<\/p>\n

Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State. SI Ajay Tomar, PS IP Estate. Ms. Stuti Gupta, Advocate for R-2.<\/p>\n

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"penal<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A person in a position of authority may make difficult decisions that, while harsh, are part of their professional responsibilities. Such actions cannot be deemed incitement or abetment under Section 306 of the IPC without the requisite mens rea indicating intent to cause harm.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67516,"featured_media":314886,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[74915,72373,74917,74433,74919,74913,74914,74918,74916,74920],"class_list":["post-334501","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-abetmentofsuicide","tag-delhihighcourt","tag-employeerights","tag-employmentlaw","tag-employmentsuicide","tag-mensrea","tag-section306","tag-workplaceharrasment","tag-workplaceharshness","tag-workplacesuicide"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi HC: Employment decisions not abetment under Section 306 IPC without mens rea| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court: Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court| Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court: Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-11-06T04:30:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-11-08T04:58:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court| Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi HC: Employment decisions not abetment under Section 306 IPC without mens rea| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-11-06T04:30:20+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-11-08T04:58:39+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court: Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi High Court| Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\",\"name\":\"Arunima\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arunima\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi HC: Employment decisions not abetment under Section 306 IPC without mens rea| SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court: Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court| Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea","og_description":"Delhi High Court: Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-11-06T04:30:20+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-11-08T04:58:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arunima","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Delhi High Court| Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arunima","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/","name":"Delhi HC: Employment decisions not abetment under Section 306 IPC without mens rea| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-11-06T04:30:20+00:00","dateModified":"2024-11-08T04:58:39+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb"},"description":"Delhi High Court: Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/06\/delhi-high-court-employment-decisions-not-abetment-section-306-ipc-mens-rea-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi High Court| Difficult employment decisions by employers do not constitute abetment u\/Section 306 IPC in absence of mens rea"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb","name":"Arunima","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arunima"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":215167,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/30\/del-hc-charges-under-ss-306-and-498-a-ipc-are-independent-of-each-other-discharge-under-one-does-not-ipso-facto-amount-to-acquittal-for-another\/","url_meta":{"origin":334501,"position":0},"title":"Del HC | Charges under Ss. 306 and 498-A IPC are independent of each-other; discharge under one does not ipso facto amount to acquittal for another","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 30, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. dismissed a criminal revision petition filed against the order of the trial court whereby charge under Section 498-A\u00a0(husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty)\u00a0IPC was framed against the petitioner. Petitioner was married to the deceased who committed suicide on the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":224166,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/13\/del-hc-conviction-under-s-498-a-does-not-automatically-render-the-accused-liable-to-be-held-guilty-under-s-306-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":334501,"position":1},"title":"Del HC | Conviction under S. 498-A does not automatically render the accused liable to be held guilty under S. 306 IPC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 13, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Sachdeva, J., set aside the order of the trial court challenged by the appellant, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 498-A\u00a0(husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty)\u00a0and Section 306\u00a0(abetment of suicide)\u00a0of the Penal Code. The wife\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":208024,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/01\/14\/delhi-hc-slapping-husband-in-presence-of-others-not-enough-to-show-instigation-to-commit-suicide\/","url_meta":{"origin":334501,"position":2},"title":"Del HC| Slapping husband in presence of others not enough to show instigation to commit suicide","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 14, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0The Bench of Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. discharged the petitioner-wife of the offence under Section 306 IPC for allegedly abetting suicide of her husband. Petitioner was wife of the deceased who committed suicide in 2015. It was alleged that on 31-7-2015, petitioner had slapped the deceased in front of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":225281,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/07\/bom-hc-a-fatal-impulse-or-an-ill-fated-thought-of-the-deceased-cannot-fray-the-fabric-of-s-306-ipc-acquittal-of-in-laws-for-abetting-suicide-of-woman-upheld\/","url_meta":{"origin":334501,"position":3},"title":"Bom HC | A fatal impulse or an ill-fated thought of the deceased cannot fray the fabric of S. 306 IPC; Acquittal of in-laws for abetting suicide of woman upheld","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 7, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0K.R. Shriram, J., dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the trial court whereby the respondent-accused were acquitted of the offences under Section 498-A\u00a0(husband or relative of a woman subjecting her to cruelty)\u00a0and Section 306\u00a0(abetment of suicide)\u00a0read with Section 34\u00a0(acts done by several persons in furtherance of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":271404,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/09\/andhra-pradesh-high-court-mere-allegations-of-pressure-or-harassment-at-workplace-will-not-suffice-to-attract-ingredients-of-s-306-ipc-proof-of-instigation-and-abetment-is-necessary\/","url_meta":{"origin":334501,"position":4},"title":"Andhra Pradesh High Court | Mere allegations of pressure or harassment at workplace will not suffice to attract ingredients of S. 306 IPC; Proof of instigation and abetment is necessary","author":"Editor","date":"August 9, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Andhra Pradesh High Court: Subba Reddy Satti J. granted anticipatory bail to the Chief Executing Officer (applicant-accused) as on perusal of complaint there was no sign of instigation and abetment and mere allegation of harassment will not attract offence under Section 306 Penal Code, 1860 (\u2018IPC') unless such\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":235115,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/31\/guj-hc-will-the-act-of-demanding-repayment-of-money-bring-a-case-within-the-meaning-of-s-306-ipc-hc-throws-light-on-ingredients-of-abetment-to-suicide\/","url_meta":{"origin":334501,"position":5},"title":"Guj HC | Will the Act of demanding repayment of money bring a case within the meaning of S. 306 IPC? HC throws light on ingredients of abetment to suicide","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 31, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Gujarat High Court:\u00a0Gita Gopi, J., while addressing an issue with regard to abetment to suicide held that in accordance with the ingredients of Section 306 of the Penal Code, 1860 the act of demanding the repayment of money would not bring a case within the meaning of Section 306 of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/334501","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67516"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=334501"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/334501\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=334501"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=334501"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=334501"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}