Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Lack of Evidence in Abetment Case: Availing Legal Remedy to Recover Money Cannot Amount to Abetment: Punjab and Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has handed down a verdict emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence in abetment cases. The judgment, delivered by Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi on October 17, 2023, revolves around allegations under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Section 306 (abetment of suicide), Section 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention), Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy), and Section 420 (cheating).

The court's decision, which is expected to set a precedent, stems from the case of a co-accused who was not named in the First Information Report (FIR). Remarkably, even the suicide note failed to attribute any specific role to the accused. The prosecution offered multiple explanations for the accused's possession of certain cheques, but these explanations were found lacking in substance.

The judgment underscores the principle that availing oneself of legal remedies cannot be construed as abetment in the absence of specific allegations of harassment or instigation. Furthermore, the court highlighted that the deceased had already been convicted as a result of a complaint filed by the petitioner, and the appeals of the main accused had been abated. In light of these factors, the court determined that there was no useful purpose in continuing proceedings against the present petitioner.

Justice Bedi's verdict culminated in the quashing of FIR No. 35 dated May 29, 2016, under Sections 306, 34, 120-B, and 420 IPC, registered at the Government Railway Police Station in Patiala, along with the report under Section 173(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) and all subsequent proceedings related to the petitioner.

This judgment serves as a reminder of the necessity for specific and substantial evidence in abetment cases. It reinforces the legal principle that availing oneself of legal remedies should not be misconstrued as abetment in the absence of concrete allegations of harassment or instigation. The decision is expected to have far-reaching implications for similar cases in the future.

Date of Decision: 17 October 2023

Gurpreet Singh vs State of Punjab     

Similar News