Last Updated:
The top court also stated that a remark such as asking the deceased not to live if she cannot live without marrying her lover would not constitute abetment
The court further noted that the records indicated the appellant and her family did not exert any pressure on the deceased to end her relationship. (PTI)
The Supreme Court on Tuesday observed that a woman expressing disapproval of her son’s love affair with a girl would not amount to direct or indirect instigation for abetting suicide.
The top court also stated that a remark such as asking the deceased not to live if she cannot live without marrying her lover would not constitute abetment.
“There needs to be a positive act that creates an environment where the deceased is pushed to an edge in order to sustain the charge of Section 306 of the IPC,” a bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma said.
The court allowed an appeal filed by one Laxmi Das against the Calcutta High Court’s order of June 13, 2014, which rejected her plea to quash the charge sheet filed qua suicide of a girl who allegedly had a love affair with her son.
The girl allegedly ended her life on July 3, 2008, leading to the lodging of an FIR against four persons, including the appellant and her son. The high court had quashed proceedings against the two other accused, her husband and another son.
According to the police investigation, the love affair between the deceased and the appellant’s son Babu Das began about three to four years prior to the incident. The deceased’s parents opposed the relationship and made several attempts to end it, while the accused allegedly encouraged the affair. The post-mortem report revealed that the cause of death was injuries sustained from jumping in front of a train.
On March 22, 2012, the trial court rejected an application for discharge filed by the accused.
Before the Supreme Court, the appellant argued that she had not committed any act against the deceased to instigate her to commit suicide. She contended that even if the allegations of her disapproving of the marriage were true, they did not constitute an offence under Section 306 of the IPC. The state counsel, however, maintained that the high court had rightly dismissed her plea.
After hearing the arguments, the bench clarified that when Section 306 of IPC is read with Section 107, it becomes evident that there must be (i) direct or indirect instigation; (ii) in close proximity to the commission of suicide; along with (iii) clear mens rea to abet the act of suicide.
“Upon a perusal of several judicial pronouncements, we find ourselves unable to agree with the high court and trial court. Even if all evidence on record, including the chargesheet and the witness statements, are taken to be correct, there is not an iota of evidence against the appellant,” the bench said.
The court concluded that the appellant’s actions were too remote and indirect to constitute the offense under Section 306 of IPC.
“There is no allegation against the appellant of a nature that the deceased was left with no alternative but to commit the unfortunate act of committing suicide,” the bench said.
The court further noted that the records indicated the appellant and her family did not exert any pressure on the deceased to end her relationship with Babu Das. In fact, it was the deceased’s family that opposed the relationship, the bench pointed out.
“Even if the appellant expressed her disapproval towards the marriage of Babu Das and the deceased, it does not rise to the level of direct or indirect instigation of abetting suicide. Further, a remark such as asking the deceased to not be alive if she cannot live without marrying her lover will also not gain the status of abetment. There needs to be a positive act that creates an environment where the deceased is pushed to an edge in order to sustain the charge of Section 306 IPC,” the bench said.
The court quashed the proceedings pending in a Sealdah court against appellant Laxmi Das while clarifying that the trial court is free to proceed against her son, Babu Das, in accordance with the law.
If you or someone you know needs help, call any of these helplines: Aasra (Mumbai) 022-27546669, Sneha (Chennai) 044-24640050, Sumaitri (Delhi) 011-23389090, Cooj (Goa) 0832- 2252525, Jeevan (Jamshedpur) 065-76453841, Pratheeksha (Kochi) 048-42448830, Maithri (Kochi) 0484-2540530, Roshni (Hyderabad) 040-66202000, Lifeline 033-64643267 (Kolkata)