Mere Allegation That Accused Harassed Deceased Not Sufficient For Proving Abetment To Suicide: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that a mere allegation of harassment against the accused is not sufficient to establish the offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Court acquitted the Mother-in-law of the deceased who was convicted for abetting her suicide. It was alleged that the mother-in-law and sister- in-law were harassing her for want of dowry and also on account of non- birth of child and the Trial Court had convicted her under Section 306 IPC
Justice Kirti Singh said, "Since the cause of suicide particularly in the context of the offence of abetment of suicide involves multifaceted and complex attributes of human behaviour, the Court must look for cogent and convincing proof of the act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. Mere allegation of harassment of the deceased by another person would not suffice unless there is such action on the part of the accused which compels the person to commit suicide."
The Court explained that Section 306 of the IPC has two basic ingredients-first, an act of suicide by one person and second, the abetment to commit the said act by another person(s).
In order to sustain a charge under Section 306 of the IPC, it must necessarily be proved that the accused person has conspired to and aided or instigated such commission by the deceased by way of some direct or indirect act. To prove such contribution or involvement, one of the three conditions outlined in Section 107 of the IPC has to be satisfied, the judge added.
It noted that the prosecution has failed to prove in the present case any circumstances, which the appellant had created or contributed towards that had driven the deceased to put an end to her life.
Furthermore the judge pointed that there were glaring inconsistencies and material contradictions in the deposition of the father of the deceased in his cross-examination has denied to the suggestion that in his statement recorded before the police, he has not stated that his daughter was leading a normal and cordial life in her in-laws house and that she was under depression for want of a child.
"Thus, prosecution was unable to point out or prove any active role on the part of the appellant to instigate or aid in commission of suicide by the deceased," it added.
Therefore, the Court said that the statements of the prosecution witnesses could not be taken to be a sterling evidence, and in the absence of any corroborative evidence that could make it clear that the accused by her continuous course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option but to commit suicide.
In the light of the above, the Court held that, "it is not even prima facie established that the appellant had any intention to instigate or aid or abet the deceased to commit suicide."
Observing that, "No doubt a young woman has lost her life in an unfortunate incident, however, in the absence of sufficient material to show that the appellant had intended by her words or actions to push the deceased into such a position where she was left with no other option but to commit suicide, continuation of criminal proceedings against the appellant would result in an abuse of process of law," the appeal against conviction was allowed.
Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate, Ms. Komal Parveen Singh, Advocate and
Mr. Nipun Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Ms. Kamaldeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr. G.S.Kaura, Advocate for the complainant.
Title: XXXX v. XXXX [CRA-S-1168-SB of 2006 (O&M)]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 407