When offence of abetment of suicide U/S 306 of IPC is not made out?
this court are clear that in order to convict a person under section 306 IPC
there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an
active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no
option and this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a
position that he/she committed suicide.
33. Generally, the person who commits suicide used to/liked to leave a
suicide note naming certain person as responsible for his committing
suicide. Merely because a person has been so named in the suicide note we are
not to immediately jump to the conclusion that he is an offender under
section 306 I.P.C.
34. The contents of the suicide note and other attending circumstances
have to be examined to find out whether it is abetment within the meaning of
section 306 I.P.C. read with section 107 I.P.C. There may be a case where in
the suicide note victim had named a person, who is responsible for his
committing suicide, but, on proper analysis, section 306 I.P.C. may not be
attracted to him.
35. Recently, in Rajamannar v. State rep. by The Inspector of Police,
Sewapet, Police Station,Thiruvallur District (Crl.O.P. No. 8230/2014 dated
3.4.2014). A-2 introduced A-1 to the deceased as a person who will get
railway jobs for money. Relying on this, the deceased collected money from
many and gave it to A-1. Ultimately, A-1 cheated him. The job seekers
pressurised the deceased to return their money. Under these circumstances,
the deceased and his family members have committed suicide and the deceased
left a suicide note that A-2 is responsible for their death. A-2 was arrested
for an offence under section 306 I.P.C.
36. In the facts and circumstances of the said case, this Court came to
the conclusion that prima facie section 306 I.P.C. is not attracted towards
A-2 and observed as under:
?7. On reading the entire suicide note from the beginning to end, it is seen
that A-1 duped Sugumar, who received money from many persons. They have asked
him and humiliated him. Unable to bear this humiliation, Sugumar committed
suicide.
8. For an offence under Section 306 IPC, there are twin requirements, namely,
suicide and abetment to commit suicide. No need to explain what is suicide.
But what is abetment has to be understood. It is not stated in Section 306
IPC. It is 'instigation', 'provocation', compelling a person to do certain
things or not to do certain things. This may be by words, deeds or writing or
even by signs. May be humiliation, degrading a person in the presence of
others. The act must be such that it must force, desire, compel a person to
take the extreme decision. But, it must be a positive act. Thus, the act
alleged to have committed on the part of the accused must have played a key
role for the victim to take a decision to commit suicide.
9. If a lover commits suicide due to love failure, if a student commits
suicide because of his poor performance in the examination, a client commits
suicide because his case is dismissed, the lady, examiner, lawyer
respectively cannot be held to have abetted the commission of suicide. For
the wrong decision taken by a coward, fool, idiot, a man of weak mentality, a
man of frail mentality, another person cannot be blamed as having abetted his
committing suicide. Now, in this case, the suicide note shows that unable to
bear the humiliation given by the job seekers, Sugumar committed suicide. For
this, petitioner cannot be blamed. Further, no act or deed in the nature of a
positive act forced Sugumar and his family members emanated from the
petitioner to force them to commit suicide. The conclusion would be Sugumar
died like a coward. Instead of protecting the family, he perished like an
unsuccessful man in life foolishly he also took along with him his other
family members also. For this, how can the petitioner be directly blamed.?
37. Sometimes, the decision to commit suicide might be taken by the
victim himself/herself, unaccompanied by any act or instigation etc. on the
part of the accused. A person may die like a coward. On his failure in the
examination, a student may commit suicide. They are weak minded. They are
persons of frail mentality. For their foolish mentality/decision, another
person cannot be blamed.
DATED: 16.06.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE P.DEVADASS
Crl.A.(MD)No.142 of 2016
Manikandan
Vs.
State,
rep. by the Inspector of Police,
https://www.lawweb.in/2016/06/when-offence-of-abetment-of-suicide-us.html
