There Has to Be Some Proximate Active Role in the Act of Instigation or Aiding: Delhi High Court Acquits Appellant in Abetment to Suicide Case

Share:
property interest free Property Worker Bail Medical Work Bail spDispute a Suit v Illegal Duty office Dowry Husband Parole marriage statements Financial Children Pay Property vLife PostClaims Evidence Medical delhi Goods Hindu Marriage Act Life Evidence Service Agreement CashPetitioner POCSO Property violence VIGOURA Eviction evidence BSuicide ail stability Property Advocates Samsung tax EWS Workman Delhi Delhi High Court HALDIRAM Suit Health bailDate of Decision: April 03, 2024 M/S DSS Buildtech Pvt. Ltd vs. Manoj Kayal Chargesheet bankEvidence Tobacco Payments Jail Google family non-appearance-despite-repeated-warnings-persistent-evasion-from-cbi Tribunal's Divorce Education cbi Bail Written written Disciplinary Mobile Affidavit Payment limited rape Divorce violence publication natco parole accident 25 License Cross-Examine family Maintenance public Publication Bail father Bail  specific Habitual bail OBC-NCL deed disciplinary missing property nature ews sarfaesi jail post amendment evidence jurisdiction government Candidates license Training property Cheque maintenance property 304 evidence diploma police tax divorce divorce police negligence contract disability

In a significant judgment delivered by the Delhi High Court, the appellant Zulfikar, also known as Bobby, was acquitted in an abetment to suicide case under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court, presided over by Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, overturned the trial court’s conviction, emphasizing that “there has to be some proximate active role in the act of instigation or aiding.”

Legal Background and Facts:

The case pertained to the unfortunate suicide of the appellant’s mother, who had set herself on fire. The trial court had convicted Zulfikar based on allegations that he had handed over a lighter to his mother, thereby abetting the act. This conviction came despite contradictory witness testimonies and allegations of a biased investigation influenced by the deceased’s estranged husband, Razi Hasan.

Issues Arising and Court’s Detailed Assessment:

Abetment to Suicide and Role of Appellant:

The High Court scrutinized the evidence and found it insufficient to demonstrate Zulfikar’s intent or active participation in the alleged abetment. The court noted his efforts to save his mother by attempting to extinguish the flames, which contradicted the accusations.

Evaluation of Witness Credibility:

The credibility of key prosecution witnesses was questioned due to their close relations and possible bias stemming from connections with Razi Hasan, the school’s principal. The court was critical of the trial court’s reliance on their statements without acknowledging these potential biases.

Legal Analysis by the High Court:

Justice Mendiratta highlighted the necessity of proving a direct and active role in abetting suicide, which was not met in this case. The evidence pointed towards a complex family dispute rather than a clear case of abetment.

Decision: The Delhi High Court acquitted Zulfikar, setting aside the trial court’s judgment, citing a lack of direct evidence and failure to establish his active participation in the alleged crime beyond reasonable doubt.

Date of Decision: April 29, 2024

 Zulfikar @ Bobby Versus State of NCT of Delhi

Download Judgment

Share: