Broken Relationship By Itself Does Not Amount To Abetment To Suicide: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court acquitted a man convicted of abetment of suicide while holding that a broken relationship by itself would not amount to abetment to suicide.
The Court set aside the Order of conviction by the Karnataka High Court under Sections 417 and 306 of the IPC. The Court stated that simply because the Appellant refused to marry the deceased, it would not become a case of instigating, inciting or provoking the deceased to commit suicide.
The Bench of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed, “We find that the accused-appellant had simply refused to marry the deceased and thus, even assuming there was love between the parties, it is only a case of broken relationship which by itself would not amount to abetment to suicide. The accused-appellant had not provoked the deceased in any manner to kill herself; rather the deceased herself carried poison in a bottle from her village while going to Kakati, Karnataka with a predetermined mind to positively get an affirmation from the accused-appellant to marry her, failing which she would commit suicide.”
AOR Shirish K. Deshpande represented the Appellant, while AAG Muhammad Ali Khan appeared for the Respondent.
As per the prosecution, the 21-year-old woman (deceased) had consumed poison after the Appellant allegedly refused to marry her. The Appellant and the deceased were allegedly in a relationship for eight years. The deceased’s mother filed an FIR alleging that the Appellant had promised marriage but later refused.
The prosecution relied on two dying declarations made by the deceased, statements from family members, and circumstantial evidence. The appellant was initially acquitted of all charges, including Section 376 of the IPC, by the Trial Court. However, the High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted the Appellant under Sections 417 and 306 of the IPC.
The Supreme Court pointed out that instigation to do a particular thing was necessary for charging a person with abetment. “Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a particular thing and without the positive act on part of the accused there would be no instigation,” it explained.
“Even in cases where the victim commits suicide, which may be as a result of cruelty meted out to her, the Courts have always held that discord and differences in domestic life are quite common in society and that the commission of such an offence largely depends upon the mental state of the victim. Surely, until and unless some guilty intention on the part of the accused is established, it is ordinarily not possible to convict him for an offence under Section 306 IPC,” the Court remarked.
The Bench noted that the Appellant on asking of the deceased had simply refused to marry her which was “not a positive act on his part with any intention to abet the crime of suicide.”
Consequently, the Court held, “We are of the opinion that the judgment and order of the High Court dated 15.12.2011 cannot be sustained in law and is hereby set aside and the accused-appellant stands acquitted as was done by the trial court.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi v. State Of Maharashtra (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 908)
Appearance:
Appellant: AOR Shirish K. Deshpande
Respondent: AAG Muhammad Ali Khan; Advocates Omar Hoda, Eesha Bakshi, Kamran Khan, Arjun Sharma and Gurbani Bhatia; AOR D. L. Chidananda
