Recently, the Supreme Court has set aside the charges framed under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), against Thangavel, a school correspondent who was accused of abetting a student’s suicide. The decision stressed the necessity of establishing mens rea in cases of abetment to suicide, as well as laid emphasis on the liability that is attributable to the individuals playing supervisory roles.
The case stems from an incident leading registration of an FIR by the CBCID, charging Thangavel under Section 306 IPC and Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). Thangavel, as the correspondent managing a school and hostel, reprimanded a student following a complaint by another student. The disciplined student subsequently locked himself in a room and died by suicide using a nylon rope.
Counsel for Thangavel argued that the scolding was a justified disciplinary measure, devoid of personal animosity, aimed at maintaining order in the hostel. It was submitted that the appellant, acting in a guardian-like capacity, could not have foreseen that his reprimand would lead to such an extreme outcome. The absence of criminal intent was emphasized, with counsel asserting that no rational person could anticipate suicide as a consequence of such an action.
The State of Tamil Nadu conceded that there appeared to be no valid basis for charging Thangavel under Section 306 IPC.
The Apex Court, comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, meticulously examined the factual matrix and legal principles governing abetment under Section 306 IPC. The Court observed, “no normal person could have imagined that a scolding, that too based on a complaint by a student, would result in such tragedy due to the student so scolded taking his own life.”
The Court further noted, “such scolding was the least, a correspondent was required to do, to ensure that the complaint made against the deceased by another student was taken note of and remedial measures effected.”
It was also held that, “under such admitted factual position, no mens rea can be attributed to the appellant much less, with regard to abatement of suicide committed by the deceased.”
Under the light of the foregoing discussion, the Court allowed the appeal, while overturning the Madras High Court’s order and quashing the charges framed against Thangavel under Section 306 IPC.
Case Title: Thangavel Vs. The State, Through Inspector of Police & Anr.
Coram: Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Appellant: Sr. Adv. Gaurav Agarwal, AOR Mayank Pandey, Adv. Ashish Kumar Pandey, Adv. Arun, Adv. Ankur Singhal
Counsel for Respondent: AAG Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Sabarish Subramanian, Adv. Beno Bencigar, Adv. S.P. Kashyap, AOR Parijat Kishore
Read Order @ Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
