“High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Upholds Acquittal in Abetment to Suicide Case: No Direct Evidence of Instigation, Mere Domestic Altercations Insufficient for Conviction”

Court’s Decision:

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed the appeal filed by the State against the acquittal of the accused under Section 306 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC), upholding the trial court’s judgment. The court found no sufficient evidence to establish that the accused had instigated or abetted the deceased to commit suicide.

Facts:

The case originated from an incident on 01.05.2009, where a woman allegedly consumed poison and later died. The police initiated an investigation and charged the accused—her husband and brother-in-law—under Section 306 RPC, which pertains to abetment of suicide. The trial court acquitted the accused, citing insufficient evidence of instigation or abetment.

Issues:

The primary issue was whether the accused had abetted the deceased’s suicide by their actions or omissions, thereby making them culpable under Section 306 RPC.

Petitioner’s Arguments:

The State argued that the trial court had failed to appreciate the evidence presented, including testimony from the deceased’s family, which highlighted that the accused subjected the deceased to cruelty, ultimately driving her to commit suicide. The State asserted that this constituted abetment under Section 306 RPC.

Respondent’s Arguments:

The defense maintained that the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to prove the charge of abetment. They argued that the accusations were based on general allegations without specific incidents, and several key witnesses had either turned hostile or did not support the prosecution’s case.

Analysis of the Law:

Section 306 RPC deals with the abetment of suicide, and abetment requires a mental process of instigating or aiding someone to commit the act. The court emphasized that there must be clear evidence of instigation or intentional aiding, and not mere domestic quarrels or trivial discord, which are common in households.

Precedent Analysis:

The court relied on precedents from the Supreme Court, particularly State of West Bengal vs. Orilal Jaiswal and Pawan Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, which underscore that mere allegations of harassment without direct actions leading to suicide do not meet the threshold for abetment under Section 306. The court reiterated that conviction under this section requires proximate positive actions from the accused that directly lead to the suicide.

Court’s Reasoning:

The court found that there was no direct or circumstantial evidence proving that the accused had instigated or aided the deceased to commit suicide. The court noted that domestic altercations, such as the one alleged in this case, cannot be construed as abetment unless there is evidence of specific instigation or coercion. Furthermore, most of the prosecution’s witnesses either turned hostile or provided insufficient evidence to support the claims of cruelty and dowry demands.

Conclusion:

The High Court upheld the trial court’s decision, concluding that the allegations of harassment were not supported by sufficient evidence. The acquittal was reaffirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.

Implications:

This judgment reaffirms that mere domestic disputes or casual remarks, without more, do not constitute abetment to suicide. It underscores the necessity of proving direct and proximate acts of instigation or aid in cases under Section 306 RPC. The court also highlighted the importance of concrete evidence, particularly when dealing with allegations of cruelty and dowry demands.

Also Read – Uttarakhand High Court Grants One Year Installment Plan for Loan Repayment Due to Petitioner’s Disability, Holds Execution of Decree in Abeyance Pending Compliance