Mere Allegation Without Positive Act Of Instigation Or Intentionally Aiding Not Abetment Of Suicide U/S 306 IPC: Patna High Court
The Patna High Court allowed a Criminal Appeal preferred against the Trial Court’s Judgment, which convicted a husband for the offence of abetment of suicide
Justice Alok Kumar Pandey, Patna High Court
The Patna High Court held that mere allegation without any positive act of instigation or intentionally aiding cannot attract Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
The Court held thus in a Criminal Appeal preferred against the Trial Court’s Judgment, which convicted a husband for the offence of abetment of suicide and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three years and six months along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-.
A Single Bench of Justice Alok Kumar Pandey observed, “In the present case, there was no evidence that the appellant has instigated, conspired, intentionally aided so as to drive the wife to commit suicide and there was no evidence of direct triggering act that left the deceased with no other option but to commit suicide. Neither informant nor any other witness has stated that appellant was instigating or intentionally aiding in the commission of suicide by the victim/deceased. Merely allegation without any positive act of instigation or intentionally aiding cannot attract Section 306 of the IPC.”
Advocate Sanjay Kumar Tiwary appeared for the Appellant/Accused, while APP Anita Kumari Singh appeared for the Respondent/State.
Facts of the Case
The informant (father) solemnized the marriage of his daughter with the Appellant-accused according to Hindu rites and rituals. It was alleged that after some days, the accused and his wife started quarrelling on the issue of dowry which was being informed by informant's daughter. The informant had pacified the dispute on one or two occasions. In June 2023, on the issue of going outside in connection with livelihood, informant's daughter was allegedly killed by the accused and others at about 10:00 PM regarding which he got information the next day in the morning.
On such information, the informant reached the house of his son-in-law where he found that his daughter was allegedly lying dead. Resultantly, a case was registered under Sections 304(B) and 34 of the IPC. The Trial Court framed charges against the accused under Sections 304(B), 34, and 302 of the IPC. After hearing the parties, the Trial Court convicted the accused. Being aggrieved, the accused approached the High Court.
Reasoning
The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, noted, “In the present case, the informant/PW-2 has improvised his evidence adduced during course of trial and he has also admitted that at the time of marriage, no demand was made. I.O./PW4 has stated that dowry was not demanded by the appellant.”
The Court said that even no witness has stated that the victim was being tortured for dowry, rather Investigating Officer (IO) stated that the Appellant is a poor fellow and he was asked by his wife-deceased to go outside for earning but he has taken plea of children for not going outside.
“The contention of learned counsel for the appellant is quite convincing in the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. … On all counts from the analysis of evidence of prosecution witnesses as well as material available on record, I find that appellant has not committed any positive act amounting to instigation or intentionally aiding in commission of suicide”, it added.
The Court was of the view that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and hence, the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence passed by the concerned Court are not justified and legal and the same is fit to be set aside.
“In the result, in my view, prosecution case suffers from several infirmities, as noticed above, and it was not a fit case where conviction could have been recorded. The learned trial court fell in error of law as well as appreciation of facts of the case in view of settled criminal jurisprudence”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Appeal, set aside the impugned Judgment, and acquitted the accused.
Cause Title- Nanhak Rai v. The State of Bihar (Case Number: CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3685 of 2025)
