Allegations Of Theft, Public Humiliation Not Enough To Attract Abetment Of Suicide U/S 306 IPC: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of multiple accused under Section 306/34 IPC, holding that the prosecution failed to establish the essential ingredients of abetment of suicide beyond a reasonable doubt.

Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das noted that although the deceased died by suicide, mere allegations of harassment or branding him a thief were insufficient to attract Section 306 IPC in the absence of clear mens rea, instigation, or a direct act leading the deceased to take his life.

The Court found glaring inconsistencies in the testimonies of the deceased's family members, lack of independent corroboration, and serious lapses in investigation, including failure to examine neighbouring witnesses and seize material evidence.

Relying on Supreme Court precedents, including Gangula Mohan Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, the Court reiterated that abetment requires a positive, intentional act and that suspicion or conjecture cannot substitute proof.

Applying the “benefit of doubt” principle, the Court held that an alternative and plausible explanation—that the deceased was upset due to allegations of theft and scolding by family members—could not be ruled out.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellants were directed to be released from their bail bonds.

Case: PABITRA ROY & ORS. VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Case No: CRA 696 OF 2012

Click here to read order