2019 (7) TMI 2054 - SC - Indian Laws

Abetment of suicide by the daughter of the complainant - offence punishable Under Section 306 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code - benefit of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 - HELD THAT - The daughter of the complainant was found dead on 06.05.1996 after committing suicide and the cause for her taking such extreme step is said to be the continuous humiliation and harassment by the Accused; the last such incident being of 05.05.1996. It is therefore evident that the Appellant No. 2 was about 16 years of age as on the date/s of incident/s. Though this fact was not placed for consideration before the Trial Court and the High Court but in the light of the law declared by this Court in the case of RAJU VERSUS THE STATE OF HARYANA 2019 (2) TMI 2124 - SUPREME COURT he is entitled to raise this plea even in this appeal. In view of Sections 2(k) 2(l) 7A read with Section 20 of the Act of 2000 the Appellant No. 2 being a juvenile who had not completed 18 years of age on the date of commission of the offence remains entitled to the benefit of juvenility. This Court also issued notice to the Appellants as to why they be not suitably punished under appropriate provisions of the Indian Penal Code even if they were not held guilty for commission of offence Under Section 306 Indian Penal Code with reference to the evidence on record. Apparently this notice was issued to the Appellants with reference to the offence specified in Section 509 Indian Penal Code being of word gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman - Even during the course of hearing of this matter we have heard learned Counsel for the parties at sufficient length on this question of the offence in the alternative. However having scanned through the entire record with reference to the law applicable we have no hesitation in concluding that the present case squarely falls within the ambit of Section 306 Indian Penal Code and the Appellants have rightly been held guilty thereunder. In the case of RAMESH KUMAR VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH 2001 (10) TMI 1169 - SUPREME COURT a three-Judge bench of this Court held that the ingredients of Section 306 Indian Penal Code were not satisfactorily proved so as to implicate and punish the Accused for the same. The facts of the case leading to the aforementioned decision had been that the deceased was married to the Accused for about a year. The deceased committed suicide by pouring kerosene and setting herself on fire in the kitchen. On the day of incident the Accused had refused to take the deceased to her sister s house and in the quarrel that ensued the Accused-husband told the deceased-wife that she was free to do whatever she wished to and to go wherever she wanted to - The Accused-Appellant was convicted by the Trial Court for the offences Under Sections 306 and 498-A Indian Penal Code and his conviction was upheld by the High Court. In further appeal after examining the evidence led in by the parties and taking note of all the surrounding factors this Court while maintaining the conviction of the Appellant Under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code set aside his conviction for offence Under Section 306. For the purpose of finding out if a person has abetted commission of suicide by another the consideration would be if the Accused is guilty of the act of instigation of the act of suicide. As explained and reiterated by this Court in the decisions above-referred instigation means to goad urge forward provoke incite or encourage to do an act. If the persons who committed suicide had been hypersensitive and the action of Accused is otherwise not ordinarily expected to induce a similarly circumstanced person to commit suicide it may not be safe to hold the Accused guilty of abetment of suicide - The question of mens rea on the part of the Accused in such cases would be examined with reference to the actual acts and deeds of the Accused and if the acts and deeds are only of such nature where the Accused intended nothing more than harassment or snap show of anger a particular case may fall short of the offence of abetment of suicide. However if the Accused kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by words or deeds until the deceased reacted or was provoked a particular case may be that of abetment of suicide. Such being the matter of delicate analysis of human behaviour each case is required to be examined on its own facts while taking note of all the surrounding factors having bearing on the actions and psyche of the Accused and the deceased. Conclusion - The conviction of the accused under Section 306 IPC upheld except for Appellant No. 2 who was found to be a juvenile at the time of the offense. The proceedings against Appellant No. 2 were terminated while the other appellants were required to serve the remaining part of their sentence. Appeal allowed in part.

Summary

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal issues considered in this judgment include:

(i) Whether the accused persons were guilty of the acts and utterances attributed to them, which allegedly led to the suicide of the complainant's daughter.

(ii) Whether such acts and utterances amounted to abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or merely constituted an offense under Section 509 IPC, which deals with insulting the modesty of a woman.

(iii) Whether the accused, particularly Appellant No. 2, was entitled to the benefit of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, due to his age at the time of the offense.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue (i): Acts and Utterances of the Accused

- Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The legal framework involves Section 306 IPC, which deals with abetment of suicide, and Section 107 IPC, which defines abetment. The precedents considered include cases like Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh and Pawan Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh, which elucidate the requirements for proving abetment.

- Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court examined the continuous nature of the accused's actions and utterances, which were aimed at humiliating and demeaning the deceased. The Court found that these actions were not isolated incidents but part of a continuous course of conduct intended to harass the deceased.

- Key Evidence and Findings: The testimonies of prosecution witnesses, particularly PW-1 (the complainant), PW-2, and PW-11, established that the accused repeatedly taunted the deceased, leading to her suicide. The evidence showed that the accused's actions were calculated to humiliate the deceased, considering her broken engagement and other personal circumstances.

- Application of Law to Facts: The Court applied the principles of abetment, as defined under Section 107 IPC, to conclude that the accused's continuous harassment and humiliation of the deceased constituted instigation, thereby amounting to abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.

- Treatment of Competing Arguments: The defense argued that the deceased was depressed due to personal issues like failing her exams and a broken engagement. However, the Court found that the accused's actions were the proximate cause of the suicide, dismissing the defense's arguments.

- Conclusions: The Court concluded that the accused were guilty of abetment of suicide, as their actions directly led to the deceased's decision to end her life.

Issue (ii): Nature of the Offense

- Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The Court considered Section 509 IPC, which deals with insulting the modesty of a woman, alongside Section 306 IPC. The case law discussed included decisions on the interpretation of "instigation" and "abetment" under the IPC.

- Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court reasoned that the accused's actions went beyond mere insult or intimidation and amounted to instigation, thereby fulfilling the criteria for abetment of suicide.

- Key Evidence and Findings: The continuous nature of the accused's taunts and the immediate proximity of the suicide to the last incident of harassment were pivotal in establishing the offense under Section 306 IPC.

- Application of Law to Facts: The Court found that the accused's actions were calculated and intended to drive the deceased to a point of helplessness, leading to her suicide.

- Treatment of Competing Arguments: The defense's alternative argument that the actions could only amount to an offense under Section 509 IPC was rejected, as the Court found the actions to be of a more serious nature, constituting abetment of suicide.

- Conclusions: The Court upheld the conviction under Section 306 IPC, finding the actions of the accused to be instigative rather than merely insulting.

Issue (iii): Juvenility of Appellant No. 2

- Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, was considered, particularly Sections 2(k), 2(l), 7A, and 20, which define and provide for the treatment of juveniles.

- Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court found that Appellant No. 2 was a juvenile at the time of the offense, based on the matriculation certificate provided, which recorded his date of birth as 20.04.1980.

- Key Evidence and Findings: The matriculation certificate was undisputed and established that Appellant No. 2 was below 18 years of age at the time of the offense.

- Application of Law to Facts: The Court applied the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act to conclude that Appellant No. 2 was entitled to the benefits of juvenility, leading to the termination of proceedings against him.

- Treatment of Competing Arguments: The prosecution did not dispute the evidence of juvenility, and the Court found no reason to doubt the veracity of the certificate.

- Conclusions: The appeal was allowed concerning Appellant No. 2, and the proceedings against him were terminated.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

- Core Principles Established: The judgment reaffirmed the principles surrounding abetment of suicide, emphasizing the need for a continuous course of conduct that instigates the victim to commit suicide. It also highlighted the importance of considering the proximate cause of suicide in determining abetment.

- Final Determinations on Each Issue: The Court upheld the conviction of the accused under Section 306 IPC, except for Appellant No. 2, who was found to be a juvenile at the time of the offense. The proceedings against Appellant No. 2 were terminated, while the other appellants were required to serve the remaining part of their sentence.