High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries High Court of Himachal Pradesh Dismisses Bail Plea in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam: Rajdeep Singh Case Execution of Conveyance Ends Arbitration Clause; Appeal for Arbitration Rejected: Bombay High Court Allahabad High Court Denies Tax Refund for Hybrid Vehicle Purchased Before Electric Vehicle Exemption Policy Entering A Room with Someone Cannot, By Any Stretch Of Imagination, Be Considered Consent For Sexual Intercourse: Bombay High Court No Specific Format Needed for Dying Declaration, Focus on Mental State and Voluntariness: Calcutta High Court Delhi High Court Allows Direct Appeal Under DVAT Act Without Tribunal Reference for Pre-2005 Tax Periods NDPS | Mere Registration of Cases Does Not Override Presumption of Innocence: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Previous Antecedents and No Communal Tension: High Court Grants Bail in Caste-Based Abuse Case Detention of Petitioner Would Amount to Pre-Trial Punishment: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail in Dowry Harassment Case Loss of Confidence Must Be Objectively Proven to Deny Reinstatement: Kerala High Court Reinstates Workman After Flawed Domestic Enquiry Procedural lapses should not deny justice: Andhra High Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case Canteen Subsidy Constitutes Part of Dearness Allowance Under EPF Act: Gujarat High Court Concurrent Findings Demonstrate Credibility – Jharkhand High Court Affirms Conviction in Cheating Case 125 Cr.P.C | Financial responsibility towards dependents cannot be shirked due to personal obligations: Punjab and Haryana High Court Mere Acceptance of Money Without Proof of Demand is Not Sufficient to Establish Corruption Charges Gujrat High Court Evidence Insufficient to Support Claims: Orissa High Court Affirms Appellate Court’s Reversal in Wrongful Confinement and Defamation Case Harmonious Interpretation of PWDV Act and Senior Citizens Act is Crucial: Kerala High Court in Domestic Violence Case

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

 

Similar News