The Karnataka High Court emphasized that uttering the phrase “go hang yourself” does not automatically constitute abetment of suicide under the Indian Penal Code. The court echoed observations made by various judicial bodies, highlighting the complexity of the human mind and the myriad reasons that could drive someone to take their own life. In a judgment delivered on April 22nd, the court cited the possibility of factors such as illicit relationships, stating that understanding the human mind remains a profound challenge.
Karnataka: Recently, The Karnataka High Court quashed a criminal case filed against a man accused of abetting the suicide of a Christian priest. The accused was alleged to have told the priest to hang himself due to an alleged affair with the accused man’s wife.
However, the court held that such remarks alone were insufficient to establish suicide abetment under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The judgment emphasized the complexities of the human mind and the challenges of determining the motives behind suicide.
READ ALSO: Watchman’s Suicide Case | Retracting Witness Statement Not Inciting Suicide: Gujarat HC
The Karnataka High Court, presided over by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, stated that the accused, as the sole person responsible for the alleged remarks, cannot automatically be held liable for suicide abetment. The court further cited previous legal precedents and acknowledged the enigmatic nature of the human mind, making it difficult to unravel the exact reasons behind an individual’s decision to take their own life.
The deceased priest was found hanging in a room on October 11, 2019, following which a criminal case was registered against the accused on February 26, 2020. The prosecution argued that the priest’s suicide was a direct result of a telephone conversation he had with the accused. During the call, the accused allegedly disclosed evidence of an affair between the priest and the accused man’s wife while threatening to report the matter to the police and a bishop.
The court emphasized
Merely because the sole accused, who happened to be the husband of the woman with whom the deceased father had a certain relationship, expressed anger and said ‘go and hang yourself’, does not automatically constitute the elements of Section 107 of the IPC to qualify as an offense under Section 306 (suicide abetment) of the IPC,”.
READ ALSO: 1993 Abetment of Suicide Case| Supreme Court Acquitted Husband
“The judge reiterated the sentiments expressed by several courts regarding the complexity of the human mind, emphasizing that it is impossible to fully comprehend what factors may lead an individual to take their own life. In the present case, the reasons behind the deceased’s decision to commit suicide could be diverse, including the possibility of his involvement in an extramarital relationship with the petitioner’s wife, despite holding the roles of a father and a priest within a church. It is a well-established fact that the human mind remains inscrutable, and the pursuit of understanding its intricacies is an ongoing challenge,” stated the judgment delivered on April 22nd.
READ ALSO: Student Suicide Case || Gujarat High Court Quashes Criminal Charges Against Teacher
After evaluating the circumstances of the case, the High Court concluded that continuing with the criminal proceedings would lead to an abuse of the law and result in injustice. The court opined that the accused’s remarks, although offensive, were not sufficient to establish the offense of suicide abetment. The judgment emphasized the need for a comprehensive understanding of the human mind and highlighted the multitude of reasons that may contribute to an individual’s decision to end their life.
Case Title: David D’Souza Vs State
