Kolkata, India – The Calcutta High Court has ruled that merely threatening to implicate someone in a false criminal case does not constitute abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Unless it should be accompanied by a positive act that pushes the victim to take their own life.
Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed that there must be a clear, direct action that leaves the victim with no alternative but to take one’s life. The court found no such act in the present case and quashed the proceedings against the accused.
Case Background
The case stemmed from a complaint alleging that the petitioners were tenants in the victim’s brother’s house. They were engaged in illegal activities. The victim allegedly attempted to restrain them. but was threatened with false criminal cases. The complaint further claimed that the police were complicit and that the victim. They were unable to evict the petitioners or seek help, ultimately take one’s life in May 2012.
Court’s Observations
The defense argued that there was no evidence of illegal activities in the rented property and that the victim was not residing in the same premises as the petitioners. They also noted the absence of a suicide note implicating the accused.
The court emphasized that for abetment to suicide to be established, there must be active participation, instigation, or assistance that directly leads to the suicide. Harassment, disputes, or unpleasant behavior alone do not suffice unless they cause unbearable mental trauma that leads to the act.
Final Verdict
The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of the petitioners and dismissed the proceedings. The judgment reinforces the legal principle that a mere threat, without accompanying coercive action, does not meet the threshold for abetment under Section 306 IPC.
This decision is expected to serve as a significant precedent in similar cases. Thus, concerning the interpretation of abetment laws in India.
