MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

No Positive Action Proximate to Suicide; No Offense Under Section 306 IPC”: Supreme Court Acquits NRI in Suicide Abetment Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court today pronounced a landmark judgement in Amudha vs. The State represented by the Inspector of Police & Anr., acquitting an NRI of charges under Section 306 of the IPC for lack of evidence of incitement or action leading to the suicide of her uncle. The ruling, delivered by Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, emphasized that “No act is attributed to the appellant proximate to the time of the suicide which was of such a nature that the deceased was left with no alternative but to take the drastic step of committing suicide.

The case revolved around the interpretation of Section 306 of the IPC, which deals with the abetment of suicide. The appellant, Amudha, was accused of abetting the suicide of her uncle, who died on March 5, 2020. The main legal question was whether her actions constituted an offence under Section 306 IPC.

The case unfolded with the deceased allegedly committing suicide after a property dispute with his brother, Annamalai, and a quarrel over Amudha’s wedding card. The prosecution accused Amudha and her family members of harassing the deceased. However, the appellant argued that she had been in the USA since September 2019, with no direct contact with the deceased before his suicide.

In their detailed assessment, the Court noted the lack of direct evidence linking Amudha to the deceased’s suicide. The judges referenced key precedents, emphasizing the need for clear evidence of incitement or direct action leading to suicide for a conviction under Section 306 IPC.

Justice Oka highlighted, “Mere allegation of harassment without any positive action in proximity to the time of occurrence... a conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable.” The Court also took note of the four suicide notes, which failed to establish a clear link between the appellant and the suicide.

Decision The Supreme Court concluded that there were no acts of incitement by Amudha proximate to the date of the suicide, and thus no offence was made out against her. The proceedings against her were quashed, but the Court clarified that the trial could proceed against the other accused.

Date of Decision: March 22, 2024

Amudha vs. The State represented by the Inspector of Police & Anr.

Latest Legal News