"High Court Declares: No Quashing of Abetment of Suicide Cases Based on Settlements Alone"

In a significant ruling that sets new legal standards, the High Court, presided over by Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), clarified that serious offences, including abetment of suicide, should not be quashed simply because a settlement has been reached between the parties involved.

Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) emphasized, "Offences under Section 305 and 306 IPC are to be treated as crimes against society and not against the individual alone." The court made this observation while ruling that the case in question, involving allegations of abetment of suicide, should proceed to trial, rejecting the plea to quash the proceedings based on a settlement.

The court was unequivocal in stating that the "Criminal Proceeding cannot be nipped in the bud by exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. only because there is a settlement." This stands as a landmark decision reinforcing the gravity of offences that have wider social implications.

The court further outlined the essential ingredients required to establish an offence under Section 305 of the IPC, which deals with the abetment of suicide involving minors or insane persons. "For an offence to be made out under Section 305 IPC, it must involve suicide by a person who is a minor, or delirious, or an idiot, or intoxicated, and the accused must have abetted the commission of the suicide," the court noted.

The court has directed the trial court to consider the available materials on record while framing charges or at the relevant stages in accordance with the law. Dismissing the current review request, the High Court stated that quashing a case of such a nature "will cause miscarriage of justice."

Legal experts believe that this ruling will serve as a precedent for future cases involving serious offences, particularly those considered as crimes against society rather than individual disputes.

This ruling reinforces the legal principle that certain crimes have a societal dimension that transcends individual grievances, thereby requiring a thorough judicial review rather than an easy settlement.

Date of Decision:[18.09.2023]

Amit Polley Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr.