Mens Rea In Abetment Of Suicide Case Can Be Inferred From Successive Acts Of Accused, Not Just A Single Incident: P&H High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to grant pre-arrest bail to a man accused of abetting the suicide of a 16-year-and-11-month-old girl, observing that Mens Rea In abetment of Suicide case can be inferred from successive acts of accused, not just a single incIdent. 

It was alleged that night before the incident the petitioner had called the victim and in the suicide note it was stated that he threatened the deceased to end her life.

Considering the gravity of allegations, Justice Alok Jain explained that the mens rea has to be seen from the armchair of the proposed accused which cannot be reflected from a single action but it has to be seen from the multiple actions one after the another which left the deceased with no other option but to take such an extreme step and the same here can only be dewelled upon by going through the contents of the suicide note. Admittedly, in the present case, the petitioner was in direct contact with the deceased.

The bench further observed that, “the Court cannot lose sight of the fact that a young life has been lost and the entire family has been put to face the said irreparable loss. The demise of the child is the biggest punishment for a parent. There is no bigger punishment then to carry one's own child's dead body to the graveyard and that too, when the cause of said death has been duly recorded by the deceased before taking such an extreme step."

The Court further said that though it cannot be said to be a dying declaration but a suicide note has to be given some veracity of truth as the same is executed just before the extreme step was taken. The contents of the suicide note are to be read in totality to understand the intensity of the allegation levelled therein.

"Considering the broad parameters settled in various judgments by the Supreme Court, it has been held that the abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing a thing. To bring a charge under Section 108 of BNS the act of abetment would require a positive act of instigating or intentionally aiding another person to commit suicide," it added.

The judge pointed that it is not a case that, the petitioner was only in communication with the other co-accused but was in communication with the deceased as well.

"The allegations in the suicide note at this stage per se demonstrates that some role has been attributed to the petitioner, the suicide note continuously records the actions of the petitioner and much less a specific allegation that the petitioner wishes to kill and destroy the deceased," it added.

These observations were made while hearing the anticipatory bail plea filed by an 18 years old boy accused for offence punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

After reading the content of the suicide note, the Court noted that "prima facie there are serious allegations against the petitioner, moreover apart from suicide note there is also a phone call(s) record preceding the death of the deceased, which raises a suspicion to the involvement of the petitioner."

Moreover, if the present case is considered in the light of the settled parameters even if for the sake of argument, it is considered that the investigation in the present case is mostly with regard to the examination of digital record, then also the same cannot outweigh the serious allegations against the petitioner, it added.

The bench pointed that moreover, it is not forthcoming that the complainant has any personal grudges with the petitioner or other accused, "due to which they are falsely being implicated in the present matter."

The Court rejected the argument on authenticity and the genuineness of the suicide note.

"As with the advanced technology it is possible to determine the same and needless to mention that at such an initial stage, it is irrelevant to resort or appreciate the evidences when the prima facie availability of record is to be considered." it added.

Observing that while arriving the balance between the administration of justice and the protection of individual rights, "the administration of justice weigh heavily and would be met by not granting the concession of anticipatory bail", the Court dismissed the plea.

Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate with Mr. Jaiveer Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sangram Singh Saron, Advocate with Mr. M.B. Rajwade, Advocate for the complainant.

Title: XXX v. State of Punjab