In CRM-20740-2015-PUNJ HC- To bring home guilt of accused under Section 306 IPC, prosecution was required to lead some cogent and convincing evidence, opines P&H HC while upholding acquittal of accused in case of abatement of suicide 
Justice Namit Kumar [04-11-2022]

Read Order: Satpal v. State of Punjab and Another 

Monika Rahar

Chandigarh, November 5, 2022: While holding that there was no evidence worth in the case which may prove that the accused persons, at any point of time, instigated the deceased to commit suicide or conspired for such suicide by the deceased or aided the deceased intentionally in committing suicide, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has upheld the acquittal of the accused who was arrayed in a case of abatement of suicide. 

The Bench of Justice Namit Kumar held, “To bring home the guilt of respondent No.2 under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution was required to lead some cogent and convincing evidence, but it failed to do so. Therefore, without any positive act on the part of respondent No.2 to instigate or aid in committing suicide; and in view of the report of the chemical examiner, he cannot be held guilty by a Court of law.”

Briefly stated, on the complainant’s brother died by suicide. The complainant alleged that the deceased, was forced to consume Celphos tablets on account of torture and harassment suffered by him at the hands of Malkiat Singh. The deceased disclosed to the complainant the factum of such torture along with the fact that the accused took a blank cheque from his wife. 

The accused was arrested and while in police custody, he suffered a disclosure statement in the presence of the witnesses stating that he had kept concealed a cheque for a sum of Rs. 3 Lac in a wooden box at a shop about which only he knew and could get the same recovered. The statement was reduced into writing, which was signed by the accused and attested by the witnesses and on the basis of the same led the police party to the disclosed place and got recovered the article which was taken into possession through a memo and rough site plan of the place of this recovery was also made.

After trial, the Trial Court acquitted the accused in a case bearing an FIR under Sections 306/201 of the IPC. Hence, the instant appeal was filed by the appellant (elder brother of the deceased). 

After having heard the parties, the Court observed that in this case, there is no evidence worth the name which may prove that the accused persons, at any point of time, instigated the deceased to commit suicide or conspired for such suicide by the deceased or aided the deceased intentionally in committing suicide. 

Further, the Bench opined that to bring home the guilt of the second respondent under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution was required to lead some cogent and convincing evidence, but it failed to do so. Therefore, the Bench added that without any positive act on the part of the second respondent to instigate or aid in committing suicide and in view of the report of the chemical examiner, he could not be held guilty by a Court of law. 

In such circumstances, the Court on re-appreciation of the evidence and having regard to the language of Section 306 IPC, came to the conclusion that the prosecution evidence did not establish the ingredients of the relevant sections and that there was no evidence to show that the accused was guilty of abetment.