Pouring Kerosene On Wife And Telling Her To Die Constitutes Abetment To Suicide Even If She Ignited Herself: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that pouring kerosene on wife and telling her to die amounted to active instigation and provocation for abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, upholding the conviction of a husband whose wife subsequently set herself on fire. The Court observed that although the deceased herself ignited the fire, the accused had put her in a situation where she took the extreme step.
Justice Abhay S. Waghwase was hearing an appeal against conviction under Section 306 IPC by the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge. The prosecution case was that the appellant, who was addicted to liquor, used to beat his wife Surekha and forcibly take away her earnings from labour work. On July 25, 2013, after coming home drunk and picking up a quarrel with her, he poured kerosene over her and suggested that she die, following which Surekha, in anger, ignited herself and suffered 98% burns. She later succumbed to the injuries.
The appellant contended that the deceased had herself ignited the fire and that the prosecution had failed to establish the requisite intention or mens rea. It was argued that the act attributable to the deceased herself and the accused cannot be held responsible by imputing instigation or abetment.
The Court found that the parents of the deceased were consistent about the accused's liquor addiction, quarrels with the deceased, beatings and his forcibly taking away her earnings. It also found the dying declaration to be convincing and voluntary, noting that the Medical Officer had certified the deceased's fitness both before and after the declaration.
“… mere failure to take attestation over the toe impression will not render the entire dying declaration, which is otherwise convincing and voluntary, doubtful or unworthy of credence. The same is recorded on the same day and is thus a prompt dying declaration,” the Court remarked.
Rejecting the appellant's contention that he could not be held responsible because the deceased had herself ignited the fire, the Court held that the accused had active participation in the act.
“… after coming home in aberrated condition, he allegedly abused her and on being questioned, he allegedly beat her and thereafter he went to the extent of pouring kerosene on her and he did not stop there, but also suggested her to die, and it is thereafter that deceased ignited herself, though in anger. Here, there is active participation by accused in pouring kerosene,” the Court remarked.
The Court held that the act of the accused was clear instigation and provocation, emphasizing that his mens rea is explicit as his intentions are clear, as he himself had poured kerosene on her and suggested her to die.
“… even though deceased completed the rest of the part in anger, accused had landed deceased in such situation wherein she had taken the extreme step of igniting herself. Applying the Explanation 2 of Section 107, responsibility can be fixed on accused husband,” the Court observed.
Accordingly, the Court found no perversity or illegality in the trial court's conviction under Section 306 IPC and dismissed the criminal appeal.
Case Title: Shri Vijay v. State of Maharashtra [Criminal Appeal No. 163 of 2016]