High Court Dismisses Appeal Seeking Conviction in Abetment to Suicide Case, Rules No Evidence of Instigation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin

In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided by Justice Avneesh Jhingan, dismissed an appeal seeking the conviction of the accused in an abetment to suicide case. The judgment, delivered on 6^th July 2023, upheld the trial court’s decision to acquit the accused, emphasizing the lack of evidence establishing instigation to commit suicide.

The case revolved around an incident where the deceased, Mr. Ramesh Kumar Arora, had tragically taken his own life on 9^th March 2010. A suicide note, pointing fingers at the accused, was discovered from the deceased’s scooter. The note mentioned that the accused, who were subordinate staff at the State Bank of Patiala, Nabha Branch, along with an RBI official, were conspiring against him.

During the trial, the court examined the deposition of the complainant, Mrs. Krishna, and her son, and found that it failed to prove the abetment of suicide. The court observed that the evidence presented merely pointed to the deceased’s stress due to work-related issues and dissatisfaction with the subordinate staff’s performance. However, it did not provide any substantial proof of the accused’s intention to instigate the deceased to commit suicide.

Justice Avneesh Jhingan, in his oral observations, cited the essential ingredients of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and emphasized, “Unless the ingredients of instigation/abetment to commit suicide are satisfied, accused cannot be convicted under Section 306 IPC.” The court also clarified that insulting language or abusive behavior alone would not constitute abetment, and there must be evidence suggesting the accused’s intention to provoke the deceased to take such an extreme step.

The High Court reiterated the settled legal position that interference in an appeal against acquittal is only warranted if the judgment under appeal is perverse or based on a misreading of the evidence. Mere disagreement with the trial court’s view does not justify interference.

After a thorough analysis of the trial court’s judgment, Justice Avneesh Jhingan concluded, “The conclusion arrived at by the trial court is plausible one and does not suffer from perversity.” Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal against the acquittal was dismissed.

Date of Decision: 06.07.2023

Krishna vs State of Punjab and others