The Kerala High Court has ruled that merely filing a complaint with the police against a person does not amount to abetment of his suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas emphasized that the essence of abetment under Section 306 requires clear evidence of instigation or goading by the accused leading to suicide.

"The word 'abetment' is defined in Section 107 I.P.C. As per the said provision, the offence of abetment will arise only when there is an instigation or goading by the accused to commit suicide. The act of instigation or goading must also be proximate in time to the act of suicide. A mere complaint to a lawful authority against a person cannot be treated as an abetment as contemplated under Section 107 I.P.C," the Court said.

The Court highlighted that everyone has the right to report grievances and file complaints, which are crucial for the functioning of a welfare state. "A person is, by law, entitled to complaint against another to a lawful authority. On receipt of such a complaint, the competent authority is also entitled to inquire or investigate into the complaint as the case may be. If such acts are treated as abetment, then every individual will think twice before raising a complaint against a person, which would not augur well in the interests of a welfare state. Filing a complaint before a lawful authority cannot amount to instigation or abetment of suicide, as the intention in filing the complaint is not to instigate or goad the deceased to commit suicide," it said.

The case pertained to the death of Ravi, who committed suicide by hanging on March 6, 2016, leaving behind suicide notes that implicated the petitioners. The notes mentioned that the accused had filed a police complaint against Ravi, prompting police interrogation before his death.

The Petitioners argued that the mere act of filing a complaint cannot be construed as abetment, as it lacked the necessary intent or instigation to drive Ravi to suicide. They contended that the suicide notes themselves did not establish any direct connection to the alleged crime.

The State, however, asserted that the allegations in the suicide notes warranted a trial and argued for the prosecution of the petitioners based on the evidence presented.

The Single-Judge Bench observed that there was no evidence indicating that the petitioners intended to instigate Ravi’s suicide by filing the complaint. It further noted that treating lawful complaints as abetment would deter individuals from seeking legitimate legal recourse, which would contradict the principles of a welfare state.

Consequently, the Court quashed the chargesheet filed against the Petitioners, asserting that the prosecution lacked sufficient grounds to proceed with the case.

"A perusal of the final report does not indicate that by filing a complaint before the police station against the deceased, the accused had intended that the deceased should commit suicide. In the absence of any material indicating an intention on the part of the accused to instigate the deceased to commit suicide, prosecution of the petitioners is an abuse of the process of the court. Hence I quash the final report in Crime No.556 of 2016 of Chavakkad Police Station, which is now pending as C.P. No.48 of 2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chavakkad," the Court ordered.

Cause Title: Murali and Anr. v. The State of Kerala & Anr.

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocates S Sreekumar, K Vijayan

Respondent: Public Prosecutor Sreeja V.

Click here to read/download the Order


Justice Bechu Kurian ThomasKerala High CourtAbetment of Suicide

Sukriti Mishra