Sec.306 IPC: Words uttered in a fit of Anger do not constitute instigation, Read HC Order

The Gujarat High Court has reiterated that a word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation.

The single-judge bench of Justice Nirzar S. Desai made the observation while adjudicating upon an application under Section 482 challenging the FIR against the accused for offences under Section 306 and 114 of IPC.

The complainant was the wife of the deceased who was a fellow of the applicant. They both were having some money issue going on between them. It has been alleged in the FIR that the applicant told the deceased husband of the complaint-wife that he will not clear the dues even if he takes his life, that he is free to proceed as he pleases. Similarly all others involved in the project pertaining to which dues were pending, refused her husband to pay what he claimed as his fair share.

This pushed them both to frustration compelling them to commit suicide. However, during the attempt, the husband died while the wife survived. Consequently she filed the present FIR in all against 12 persons, including the present applicants.

The Counsel for the applicants opposed the FIR and contended that even if it is believed as it is, then also it would not constitute any offence, which can be attributable to the present applicants.

Relying on, they submitted that in respect of Section 306 IPC, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that, a word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation

It was further submitted that even if the applicants has uttered the words like, you may do whatever you like and if you want to die, you may die, then also that itself does not constitute the ingredients of instigation. There must be presence of mens rea, and therefore, the present applicants cannot be said to have committed offence under Section 306 IPC.

The Court agreed to the submission and while also following suit of a similar case it dealt in a different petition, allowed the present one.

Read Order @LatestLaws.com:

Picture Source :