Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Continuous Threats and Harassment Can Constitute Abetment Of Suicide: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Quashing Proceedings Citing Sufficient Prima Facie Evidence.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed an application filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking to quash criminal proceedings initiated under Section 306 IPC, concerning the abetment of suicide. The court, presided by Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, found sufficient prima facie evidence to proceed with the prosecution, underscoring the seriousness of continuous threats and harassment that may amount to abetment of suicide.

Background: The case stems from the tragic suicide of Chandra Shekhar @ Pawan Ahuja, who took his own life on 20th December 2022. The deceased left behind a suicide note in which he accused Dr. Shivani Nishad, her mother Rani Nishad, and others of persistently threatening and harassing him. The note detailed how these individuals allegedly lodged false cases against him and his mother, continuously threatened to falsely implicate him in serious crimes such as rape and eve-teasing, and generally made his life intolerable. These accusations led to the registration of a case under Section 306 IPC at Police Station Bamhani District Mandla. The applicants sought to quash the proceedings, arguing that the allegations did not constitute abetment under the legal definitions provided in Sections 107 and 306 IPC.

Credibility of Evidence: Justice Ahluwalia emphasized the significance of the evidence presented, particularly the suicide note and witness statements, in establishing a prima facie case of abetment. "The continuous threats to falsely implicate the deceased in serious criminal offenses, such as rape, and the consistent harassment by the accused created an environment that led to the deceased's suicide," observed the court.

Legal Reasoning on Abetment: The court elaborated on the legal framework surrounding abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, referring to key precedents and statutory definitions. The judgment stated, "Abetment involves a mental process of instigating or aiding in the commission of suicide. Continuous harassment and threats, especially those aimed at falsely implicating someone in heinous crimes, can amount to abetment."

Threats and Mental Distress: The court noted that the suicide note left by the deceased explicitly mentioned the mental distress caused by the false allegations and threats from the accused, Dr. Shivani Nishad and others. The note revealed the deceased's fear of being falsely implicated in rape and eve-teasing cases, which severely impacted his mental state and academic pursuits.

Witness Statements: Statements from multiple witnesses corroborated the claims made in the suicide note. Witnesses described a pattern of harassment and threats that undermined the deceased's self-esteem and created an intolerable living situation. One witness testified, "Applicant No.1 consistently threatened to falsely accuse the deceased of rape, which severely affected his mental health."

Judicial Precedents: The court referenced several Supreme Court judgments to reinforce its reasoning. For instance, in the case of UDE Singh v. State of Haryana, the Supreme Court held that continuous humiliation and threats could constitute abetment of suicide. Similarly, the court in M. Mohan v. State emphasized the necessity of clear mens rea and intentional acts that drive a person to suicide.

The High Court's decision to dismiss the quashing application highlights the judiciary's stance on addressing the grave issue of abetment of suicide. By recognizing the impact of continuous threats and harassment, the judgment sets a precedent for future cases, ensuring that individuals who create intolerable conditions for others through malicious actions are held accountable.

Date of Decision: 7th May 2024

Dr. Shivani Nishad And Another v. State Of Madhya Pradesh And Another

 

Latest Legal News