Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes FIR in Suicide Case, Citing Lack of Evidence for Abetment
Court Rules Mere Refusal by Wife to Live with Husband Does Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide
In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed an FIR filed against Renika Mittal and others concerning the alleged abetment of suicide by Sahib Singh. The court ruled that the refusal by Singh's wife, Manika, to live with him does not amount to instigation or provocation necessary to constitute abetment under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The case originated from an FIR registered on October 13, 2022, following Singh's attempt to commit suicide by self-immolation, which later resulted in his death. Singh's statement accused his wife and her family of causing harassment and not allowing his wife and children to live with him, which he claimed drove him to the brink of suicide. A suicide note dated March 28, 2022, was also recovered, implicating the in-laws.
Presiding over the case, Justice Yashvir Singh Rathor observed that mere marital discord and refusal to live together, without any evidence of active instigation or provocation, do not meet the legal threshold for abetment of suicide. The judgment emphasizes that for a charge under Section 306 IPC to hold, there must be clear evidence of instigation, provocation, or intentional aiding of the act of suicide.
The court referenced previous Supreme Court rulings, including the notable cases of Amalendu Pal v. State of W.B. and S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan, which underscore the necessity of a direct or active role in instigating suicide for an abetment charge to be sustained.
Justice Rathor further noted that Singh's wife had valid reasons for her actions, including previous allegations of domestic violence and threats by Singh. The judgment pointed out that Singh's wife had filed petitions under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, Section 125 of the CrPC, and complaints under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC against Singh, adding context to her refusal to reunite with him.
The court concluded that the FIR did not reveal any prima facie evidence of abetment. It highlighted the absence of mens rea, or criminal intent, necessary for instigation, and the lack of any proximate link between the wife's refusal and Singh's suicide. Consequently, the FIR, registered under Sections 306 and 511 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings, was quashed.
This ruling serves as a crucial precedent in cases involving allegations of abetment of suicide, reiterating the importance of substantial evidence of instigation or provocation for such charges to be upheld.
Bottom Line:
Refusal by wife to live with husband, in absence of any evidence of instigation, provocation, or active role in aiding the commission of suicide, does not constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 306, 107; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 482
Renika Mittal v. State of Punjab, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2791932
