Wife Filing Harassment Complaint Against Husband Does Not By Itself Amount To Abetment Of Suicide: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has held that merely lodging a police complaint by a wife alleging harassment by her husband cannot, by itself, constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).A single-judge bench of Justice Rajesh Rai K made the observation while discharging a woman, her parents and her brother from a case accusing them of abetting her...
The Karnataka High Court has held that merely lodging a police complaint by a wife alleging harassment by her husband cannot, by itself, constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
A single-judge bench of Justice Rajesh Rai K made the observation while discharging a woman, her parents and her brother from a case accusing them of abetting her husband's suicide.
The court said “Upon an overall consideration of the allegations and the statements of the witnesses, this Court finds that there is no material to indicate that the petitioners had, either directly or indirectly, instigated or intentionally aided the deceased to commit suicide. There is also no material to prima facie indicate any mens rea on the part of the petitioners to drive the deceased to commit suicide.”
As per the prosecution case, Deepika and her husband Prasad got married in 2020. Their marital relationship remained cordial for about a year, following which disputes arose between them.
In January 2022, Deepika went to her parental home and subsequently, on March 4, 2022, she lodged a complaint against her husband and mother-in-law before the Women Police Station.
Following the complaint, the police summoned the parties and advised them to resolve their matrimonial differences and lead a cordial marital life.
Prasad and his mother subsequently obtained anticipatory bail from the Sessions Court. When they approached the police station on April 18, 2022, to comply with the bail conditions, the police allegedly abused and threatened Prasad, stating that he would be put behind bars.
It was alleged that Prasad became upset and depressed following the incident and died by suicide the next day, on April 19, 2022.
Based on a complaint lodged by Prasad's mother, the police registered an FIR against Deepika, her parents and her brother for offences punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC. Following an investigation, a chargesheet was filed against them.
The accused moved an application seeking discharge before the Sessions Court, which was rejected. Aggrieved by the order, they approached the High Court.
Advocate Lokesha A N for the petitioners argued that there is absolutely no nexus between the complaint lodged by Deepika against the deceased and respondent No.2 and the commission of suicide by the deceased Prasad. By no stretch of imagination can it be said that the petitioners abetted or instigated the deceased to commit suicide.
Further it was contended that the police had allegedly threatened the deceased on 18.04.2022 at the Police station, pursuant to which he became upset and depressed and, on the following day, committed suicide.
The prosecution opposed the plea submitting that statements of material witnesses CW.8 and CW.9, namely, the brother-in-law and maternal aunt of the deceased, clearly reveal that the deceased Prasad was driven to commit suicide on account of the false complaint lodged by Deepika and the harassment meted out to him.
Further the prosecution claimed that despite there being no harassment meted out by the deceased Prasad a false complaint was lodged against him and Deepika is said to have also threatened to lodge a complaint for the offence punishable under Section 377 (Unnatural sex) of IPC against him.
The bench on going through the record noted that on careful scrutiny of the complaint, nowhere it is stated that the deceased Prasad committed suicide on account of any instigation or harassment by the petitioners. On the contrary, it is specifically alleged that when the deceased and respondent No.2 approached the Police station, the Police threatened them, stating that they would put both of them behind bars.
Following which the court observed “Admittedly, the complaint by petitioner No.1 was lodged on 04.03.2022, much prior to the date of commission of suicide by the deceased and even before registration of the FIR, the Police had summoned both parties and advised them to lead a cordial marital life.”
Referring to Apex court judgement in the case of Mariano Anto Bruno v. Inspector of Police, reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 834, wherein it has been held that, to attract the provisions of Section 306 of IPC, there must be a clear mens rea on the part of the accused to commit the offence.
Allowing the discharge application filed by the petitioners, the court said the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners/accused would amount to an abuse of the process of court.
Appearance: Advocate LOKESHA A.N, ADVOCATE for Petitioners.
HCGP MAHESHA P, FOR R1
Advocate PRAKASH M.H, FOR R2.