LI Network
Published on: 29 September 2023 at 10:50 IST
The Telangana High Court recently delivered a judgment asserting that telling someone to ‘go and die’ does not amount to abetment of suicide.
The bench, comprising Justices K. Lakshman and K. Sujana, heard an appeal challenging the verdict of the Special Sessions Judge for SC/ST (POA). In that judgment, the appellant was convicted under Sections 417, 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.
The case involved a deceased individual belonging to the Nayakapu caste, categorized under the Scheduled Tribe (ST). The accused was a toddy tapper who had previously attempted to commit rape in 2007. During the trial, the accused proposed a compromise to the deceased, offering to marry her. She agreed, and the case was settled. However, the accused later developed an illegal relationship with the deceased, deceiving her with promises of marriage after his sister’s wedding.
When the accused announced his impending marriage to another woman, the deceased, along with her brother and another person, confronted him. The accused responded by verbally abusing them, stating he would not marry the deceased due to her caste and instructing her to consume poison and die.
The deceased followed this instruction and consumed pesticide, leading to her death. The accused was charged with offenses under Sections 417, 306 IPC, and Sections 3(1)(x), 3(1)(xii), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, and was subsequently convicted.
The primary issue before the bench was whether uttering the words “go and die” was sufficient to prove instigation under Section 107 of IPC.
The High Court clarified that to establish an offense under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution must prove that the deceased committed suicide due to the accused’s abetment.
The bench referred to a precedent, State of West Bengal Vs. Orilal Jaiaswal and Another, which cautioned that courts must exercise extreme care in evaluating the facts and circumstances of each case.
It emphasized that ordinary petulance, discord, and domestic disputes common to society should not be deemed to induce suicide.
The court should refrain from finding an accused guilty of abetment unless sufficient evidence of mens rea (criminal intent) exists.
The bench concluded that the mere utterance of the words “go and die” did not constitute the offense under Section 306 IPC. It asserted that mens rea was a necessary element of instigation, and words spoken during a quarrel or in the heat of the moment did not demonstrate criminal intent.
The prosecution failed to prove mens rea in this case, and the evidence did not suffice to establish offenses under Sections 306 and 417 IPC.
Consequently, the bench deemed the impugned judgment legally unsustainable and ordered the acquittal of the accused under Section 417, 306 IPC, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.