Hriday Shah
The Supreme Court held that making a statement such as suggesting that the deceased should not live if she cannot marry her lover does not qualify as abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Court quashed the charges against the Appellant (Accused No. 4), who was accused of abetting the suicide. This decision partially overturned the Calcutta High Court’s earlier orders, which had only quashed the charges against two of the accused while dismissing the Appellant’s plea.
According to the prosecution, the deceased was allegedly in a relationship with the Appellant’s son, who was also an accused in the case. The victim was found dead near a railway station, and her death was classified as “unnatural,” with a post-mortem report indicating injuries consistent with being hit by a train. The deceased’s uncle lodged an FIR alleging abetment of suicide by the son and his family members, including the Appellant, under Sections 306, 109, and 34 of the IPC. Witnesses claimed that prior to her death, there were disputes between the deceased and the son, who had refused to marry her. The Appellant was accused of opposing the marriage and insulting the deceased.
The Supreme Court Bench, comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma held that even if it were true that the Appellant disapproved of her son’s marriage to the deceased, this did not constitute an offense under Section 306 IPC. The Bench emphasized that a mere remark or indirect action does not amount to abetment unless there is a deliberate act creating a situation where the deceased is driven to suicide. The Court observed that there was no evidence suggesting that the Appellant’s actions left the deceased with no choice but to take her own life.
The Supreme Court quashed the charges against the Appellant, stating that her alleged actions were too remote to be considered abetment under Section 306 IPC. The Court remarked that even if all evidence is assumed to be true, there was no iota of evidence against the Appellant. Consequently, the proceedings against the Appellant, Smt. Laxmi Das, in the trial court were quashed, and the appeal was allowed.
Case Title: Laxmi Das v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Diary No.: Criminal Appeal No. 706 of 2017
Bench: Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma