Victim Of Cruelty Cannot Be Blamed For Abetment Of Suicide Of Accused Because Of Complaint Made: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that the victim of cruelty who made complaint cannot be held responsible for abetment of suicide of the accused.

Justice Harkesh Manuja said,

"it cannot be accepted that when a person suffering from cruelty makes a complaint and later on the alleged accused commits suicide then the victim becomes responsible for the extreme step."

The Court was hearing an appeal against acquittal of a woman and her two siblings who were accused of abetment to suicide of the woman's husband.

It was alleged that the woman and her siblings used to pressure the woman's husband by demanding money and she falsely implicated him by lodging an FIR, accusing him of committing unnatural sex with her. 

Thereafter, the husband, Satnam Singh consumed some poisonous substance and died as a result, the plea added.

Upon trial, the wife along with other accused were acquitted of the charges by the Trial Court, while holding that the instigation of the deceased to commit suicide by the private respondents was not proved on record.

The counsel for the petitioner argued that Singh (deceased) had a stable job as a Punjab Police Constable and there was no apparent reason for him to suddenly take his life other than being allegedly pressurized at the behest of respondents for gold and money besides, his false implication in the FIR registered against him.

After hearing the submissions, the Court considered the question, "whether the deceased committed suicide due to instigation/abetment on part of the respondents and whether lodging of a complaint/FIR against deceased by respondent No.3, could be construed as an instigation/abetment under the ambit of Sections 306 and 107 of IPC."

Perusing Section 306, the Court said that "a conjoint and meaningful reading of the aforementioned statutory provisions make it reasonably clear that in order to bring home penal consequences of Section 306 there should be positive evidence on record to prove that the accused, by way of his conduct or spoken words, overtly or covertly, actually aided and abetted or instigated the deceased in such a manner that it leaves no other option for the deceased but to commit suicide."

The Court noted that in the present case, the wife upon being subjected to repeated acts of cruelty at the hands of her husband she still remained hopeful that her husband would mend his ways and tried to salvage her marriage for a period of more than 11 months post her marriage, when her husband crossed his limits, gave beatings to her on refusal to comply with request on unnatural carnal intercourse while she was pregnant, she lost her patience and left her matrimonial home.

It further noted that as per the medical examination which was conducted on the same day when she left her matrimonial home, it is clearly mentioned that there were "injuries on her ear, abdomen and mandibular area."

Justice Manuja opined that they cannot be said "to be actively conniving to force the deceased to commit suicide on 10.10.2020 as respondent No.3 (wife) left her matrimonial home on 08.09.2020 and there was lack of evidence to the effect that she ever remained in touch with deceased thereafter."

The Court also rejected the contention that deceased committed suicide due to his false implication in FIR. "Trial Court while dealing with this question has rightly held that when the battered wife took recourse to legal action against her husband then the deceased husband being a police official himself realized that he will have to face the consequences of his degenerate actions, took this drastic step and not due to his wife's recourse to legal action," said the Court.

Reliance was placed upon Apex Court's decision in Randhir Singh vs State of Punjab, (2004) 13 SCC 129, wherein it was held that, "Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding that person in doing of a thing. In cases of conspiracy also it would involve that mental process of entering into conspiracy for the doing of that thing."

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

J.K. Singla, Advocate for the appellant.

Gurlal Singh Dhillon, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 67

Title: KARAMJEET KAUR v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Click here to read/download the order