The Supreme Court of India clarified that disapproval of a marriage alone does not constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC. In the case of Laxmi Das vs State of West Bengal, the court ruled that the appellant’s actions were too indirect to warrant charges and emphasized the necessity of a direct role in instigation for such allegations.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has clarified that merely expressing disapproval of a marriage cannot be grounds for abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The decision came in the case of Laxmi Das vs State of West Bengal, as the court set aside a High Court order that upheld charges against the appellant.
Apex Court’s Stand on Abetment of Suicide
The bench, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma, noted,
“Even if the Appellant expressed her disapproval towards the marriage of Babu Das and the deceased, it does not rise to the level of direct or indirect instigation of abetting suicide.”
The court further ruled that even telling the deceased, “not to be alive if she cannot live without marrying her lover,” does not qualify as abetment of suicide. The judgment emphasized the need for a positive act that pushes the victim to the edge to sustain charges under Section 306 IPC.
Background of the Case
The case involved allegations of abetment of suicide against the appellant, the mother of a man named Babu Das, and other family members. The deceased, who was in a relationship with Babu Das, took her own life. The trial court rejected the appellant’s application for discharge, and the Calcutta High Court upheld this rejection, prompting the appellant to move the Supreme Court.
The apex court noted that the deceased’s family, rather than the appellant or her family, was unhappy with the relationship. The bench stated,
“There is no allegation against the Appellant of a nature that the deceased was left with no alternative but to commit the unfortunate act of committing suicide.”
Observations on Abetment
The Supreme Court stressed the requirement of a direct or active role in instigating the deceased for a charge under Section 306 IPC. The bench noted,
“We find that the acts of the Appellant are too remote and indirect to constitute the offense under Section 306 IPC.”
ALSO READ: SC Seeks Response From Centre On Reservation For Transgender
Advocate’s Role
Advocate Kunal Chatterjee appeared for the appellant, arguing that the appellant and her family did not attempt to pressure the deceased or force her to end her relationship with Babu Das.
Verdict
The Supreme Court concluded that the allegations against the appellant lacked sufficient merit to establish abetment. It set aside the trial court and High Court orders, offering much-needed clarity on what constitutes abetment of suicide under Indian law.
Case Title – Laxmi Das vs State of WB
Read the Judgement here:
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
