Names mentioned in suicide note must be probed seriously: Punjab & Haryana HC

Read Order: Sudha @ Babli v. State of Haryana 

LE Correspondent

Chandigarh, August 5, 2021: If a person taking his own life names someone in the suicide note then that statement must be taken seriously, the Punjab and Haryana High Court said while dismissing the pre-arrest bail plea of a woman named in an FIR for abetment of suicide. 

“It is under very compelling circumstances that one ends his own life and while doing so, if the person committing suicide named some other person being responsible to force him to take the extreme step, his such statement is required to be taken up with all the seriousness,” said the bench of Justice H S Madaan.

“Why should a person leaving this mortal world by ending his life himself would blame an innocent person holding him responsible for his death, is difficult to understand,” said the Bench.

The petitioner in the case, Sudha, was booked in Rewari, Haryana, after a person died by suicide on June 10, 2020.

The deceased had left behind a suicide note in which he blamed the present petitioner, Sudha, and her husband, Yaspal, for driving him to suicide. A formal FIR was recorded when the matter was reported to the police by the deceased’s son.

The petitioner’s counsel contended that offence under sections 306 (abetment of suicide) or 506 (criminal intimidation) of IPC is not made out against the petitioner since no abetment on her part to the suicide committed by the deceased is made out. The petitioner, the lawyer said, had never harassed the deceased, rather there was a dispute regarding some payment between them. The deceased had served a legal notice on May 22, 2020, upon the petitioner for making the payment.

The state counsel in reply submitted that the petitioner is specifically named in the suicide note.

The bench held that a perusal of such suicide note goes to show that the deceased has specifically mentioned that the petitioner-accused had contacted him in 2018 and asked him to lend money for construction of her house and he, after selling crops, gave cash amount of Rs 11,50,000 to her. The note added that when the deceased asked Sudha and her husband to return the money, they put off the matter and ultimately threatened him. 

After the petitioner’s counsel said there was a dispute over money between petitioner and deceased, the bench said it would be looked into by the trial court while determining the guilt of the accused.