The Supreme Court acquitted a woman of abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC while setting aside her conviction by the High Court of Karnataka. The court held that neighbourhood quarrels, even if unpleasant and prolonged, cannot by themselves amount to abetment to suicide without clear evidence of instigation or intent. The Court further observed 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 case arose from an incident where a young woman, distressed by continuous quarrels with her neighbour, set herself ablaze and later succumbed to injuries. The deceased alleged harassment, including insults related to her marital status and caste, which she claimed pushed her into taking the extreme step. The Trial Court convicted the accused under both Section 306 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, while acquitting other family members. The High Court later modified the conviction, setting aside the charges under the SC/ST Act but maintaining the conviction under Section 306 IPC.
The counsel for the appellant argued that there was no evidence of direct provocation or instigation by the accused that could meet the strict threshold of Section 306 IPC. It was contended that the quarrels between neighbours, though unpleasant, did not amount to abetment. On the other hand, the State sought to uphold the conviction, pointing to the deceased’s statement and allegations of sustained harassment.
The court noted that while the deceased was a sensitive person and may have felt overwhelmed due to repeated quarrels, the evidence on record did not establish the essential ingredients of abetment. It stressed that neighbourhood disputes, though regrettable, are part of community life and cannot automatically be equated with instigation to suicide. Referring to precedents such as Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of M.P. and M. Mohan v. State, the Court reiterated that instigation requires a clear intention to provoke or incite suicide, not casual remarks or heated exchanges.
The Court observed, “Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation. Everyday quarrels between neighbours, however unpleasant, cannot be stretched to infer abetment to suicide".
Holding that the ingredients of Section 306 IPC were not established, the court acquitted the appellant of the charge of abetment to suicide. It set aside the judgment of the Karnataka High Court and discharged the bail bonds of the appellant.
Case Title: Geeta vs. The State of Karnataka
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No.1044 of 2018
Coram: Justice B.V. Nagarathna, Justice K.V. Viswanathan
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Supreeta Sharanagouda (AOR), Sharanagouda Patil, Supreeta Sharanagouda (AOR), Jyotish Pandey, Yash S Tiwari, Vinod Kumar Srivastava
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. D. L. Chidananda (AOR)
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
