The Supreme Court ruled that advising a partner to marry according to parental wishes doesn’t constitute abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. In this instance, the girl died by suicide after her boyfriend suggested she marry as per her parents preference. Despite the girl becoming upset when the boy’s family began seeking a bride, the police registered an FIR under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code after her demise.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
The Supreme Court of India has made a significant observation regarding the nature of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The apex court’s ruling came in the wake of a case where a young woman’s tragic suicide was linked to advice given by her boyfriend, suggesting she marry according to her parents’ wishes. This case raised pertinent questions about the extent to which personal advice and relationship issues can be held accountable under the law for someone’s decision to end their life.
Section 306 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860
306. Abetment of suicide- If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
The case in question revolved around a grievous incident where a girl took her own life after her partner recommended she consider her parents’ choice for marriage. This suggestion came at a time when the boy’s family had begun the search for a suitable bride for him. The aftermath of the girl’s death saw the boyfriend being accused of abetting her suicide, leading to a police FIR under Section 306 of the IPC. Despite the High Court’s refusal to dismiss the case, the Supreme Court was approached for a final verdict.
ALSO READ: Hemant Soren In The Jharkhand High Court | Next hearing on plea against ED on Feb 27
The Supreme Court, led by Justices Vikram Nath and K.V. Viswanathan, provided a nuanced interpretation of what constitutes abetment to suicide. The bench stated,
“Broken relationships and heartbreaks are part of everyday life. It could not be said that the appellant by breaking up the relationship with […] and by advising her to marry in accordance with the advice of her parents, as he himself was doing, had intended to abet the suicide of […]. Hence the offence under Section 306 is not made out.”
This observation underscores the court’s stance that not all personal advice or actions in the context of a relationship breakdown can be directly linked to someone’s decision to commit suicide.
Further elaborating on the criteria for abetment to suicide, the court emphasized the need for a clear act of instigation or facilitation of the suicide by the accused.
“There must be direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. The accused must be shown to have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain acts to facilitate the commission of suicide.”
This clarification is pivotal, highlighting that mere advice or relationship issues without a direct link to the act of suicide do not meet the legal threshold for abetment.
The judgment also referenced the court’s previous decision in the Kamalakar vs. State of Karnataka case, which outlined the prosecution’s burden to prove abetment. It stated that for abetment to be established, the accused’s actions must either instigate the suicide, conspire to cause it, or contribute to it through their actions or inactions.
Moreover, the court added,
“Where the words uttered are casual in nature and which are often employed in the heat of the moment between quarreling people, and nothing serious is expected to follow from the same, the same would not amount to abetment of suicide.”
This further delineates the boundary between heated exchanges in personal relationships and actions that could legally be considered as abetting suicide.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s ruling brings clarity to the legal interpretation of abetment to suicide in the context of personal relationships and advice. By acquitting the accused of charges under Section 306 of the IPC, as well as under Section 417 (Punishment for Cheating) and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 2002, the court has set a precedent that distinguishes between the complexities of human relationships and the legal criteria for abetment to suicide.
This judgment not only provides relief to the accused but also sets a significant legal standard for future cases involving the delicate interplay between personal advice, relationship dynamics, and the law.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
