2012 (10) TMI 1276 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Quashing of criminal proceedings u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. Establishment of offence u/s 306 Indian Penal Code.
3. Determination of 'instigation' and 'mens rea' in abetment to suicide cases.

Summary:

1. Quashing of Criminal Proceedings u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure:
The appellant sought to quash the criminal proceedings initiated based on FIR No. 285 of 2005, chargesheet No. 208/2005, and the order of cognizance dated 28.4.2006 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar. The High Court of Uttarakhand dismissed the application u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, leading to the present appeal.

2. Establishment of Offence u/s 306 Indian Penal Code:
The appellant was charged u/s 306 Indian Penal Code for allegedly abetting the suicide of Anurag Singh. The deceased's brother lodged an FIR alleging persistent harassment and illegal demands by the appellant, which led to the deceased's suicide. The investigation revealed a suicide note blaming the appellant, and statements from the deceased's family corroborated the harassment claims. The appellant argued that the facts did not constitute an offence u/s 306 Indian Penal Code, emphasizing the need for mens rea and the magnitude of cruelty to drive someone to suicide.

3. Determination of 'Instigation' and 'Mens Rea' in Abetment to Suicide Cases:
The court examined precedents to determine 'instigation' and 'mens rea' in abetment to suicide cases. It referred to cases like Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of M.P., Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar v. State of M.P., and Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat, where casual remarks or isolated incidents were deemed insufficient to constitute abetment. However, in the present case, the court found persistent harassment and humiliation by the appellant, coupled with the utterance that "had there been any other person in his place, he would have certainly committed suicide," distinguished it from previous cases. The court held that the circumstances created a situation where the deceased felt compelled to commit suicide.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's decision not to quash the chargesheet and criminal proceedings against the appellant. The court clarified that the observations made would not affect the appellant's rights during the trial.