Involvement Of Spouse In Extra-Marital Affair May Not Always Invite Conviction For Abetment Of Suicide: Gujarat HC
The Gujarat High Court reiterated that the involvement of the spouse in an extra-marital affair may not invite conviction for the offence of abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Court quashed a case against a woman and her partner accused of abetting suicide of the said woman’s husband.
A Single Bench of Justice Divyesh A. Joshi observed, “As observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid decision, the involvement of accused No.1 in an extra-marital affair with accused No.2 may not invite conviction under Section 306 IPC. Even for the sake of arguments, if the contents of the FIR are to be accepted as it is, it cannot be said that there was any intention on the part of the applicants to abet the commission of suicide by the deceased, who is the husband of accused No.1 and therefore no mens rea can be attributed.”
The Bench said that the very element of abetment is missing from the allegations levelled in the FIR and in absence of the element of abetment from the allegations, the offence under Section 306 IPC would not be attracted.
Advocates A.J. Yagnik and Bhavik R. Samani appeared for the applicants while APP Monali Bhatt and Advocate R.J. Goswami appeared for the respondents.
Facts of the Case -
As per the FIR, the accused no.1 i.e., the wife of the deceased (husband) was allegedly having extramarital affairs with the accused no.2 (wife’s partner) and this came to the notice of the deceased due to which he was upset. The deceased warned his wife to cut her relations with that man, otherwise he would commit suicide. In spite of that, she continued her relations with that man. Hence, it was alleged that both the accused persons abetted and instigated the deceased to commit suicide.
The counsel for the applicants (accused) submitted that as per the prosecution case, the so-called incident occurred on January 11, 2017 and the FIR was filed on January 30, 2017, and hence, there was gross delay of 19 days in registering the FIR. The accused, therefore, preferred an application before the High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) seeking to quash and set aside the FIR.
The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case noted, “In the present case, taking the contents of the FIR as correct, it is impossible to conclude that the applicants have instigated the deceased to commit suicide. By no stretch of imagination, the alleged act of the applicants can amount to instigate the deceased to commit suicide.”
The Court having regard to the provisions of Sections 107 and 306 of the IPC and the principle laid down by the Apex Court in various decisions referred to in the case of Lalitbhai Vikramchand Parekh v. State of Gujarat (Criminal Misc. Application No.16032 of 2014), enunciated that in a case under Section 306 of IPC, there should be correct mens rea to commit the offence under this Section and there should be direct and active role by the accused, which led the deceased to commit the suicide.
“Undoubtedly, this Court has inherent power to do real and substantial justice, or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. At the same time, the Court must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound principles. The inherent power vested in the Court should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. However, this Court can exercise its inherent power or extra-ordinary power if the Court comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court, or the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed”, added.
The Court said that the allegations in the FIR do not constitute the offence alleged and the chances of an ultimate conviction after full-fledged trial are bleak and continuation of criminal prosecution against the applicants-accused is merely an empty formality and wastage of prestigious time of the Court.
“I am conscious of the pain and suffering of the complainant, who is the mother of the deceased. It is also very unfortunate that the deceased has lost his life but as observed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Geo Verghese (supra), the sympathy of the Court and pain and suffering of the complainant, cannot translate into a legal remedy, much less a criminal prosecution”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the applications and quashed the FIR against the accused persons.
Cause Title- Dr. Rajeshkumar Somabhai Katara v. State of Gujarat & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:GUJHC:45947)
Appearance:
Applicants: Advocates A.J. Yagnik, Bhavik R. Samani, and Manoj Shrimali.
Respondents: APP Monali Bhatt, Advocates R.J. Goswami, and H.K. Nayak.
