news details |
|
|
| Proof of incitement must for abetment of suicide: SC | | |
Agencies
New Delhi, Oct 12: There must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement and evidence of continuous harassment against the accused in an abetment to suicide case for holding them guilty, the Supreme Court observed on Wednesday and acquitted a Chennai-based doctor and his mother convicted of driving his wife to take the extreme step.
It said there should also be cogent evidence to establish a positive action by the accused which should be proximate to the time of occurrence and can be said to have led or compelled a person to take the drastic step.
A bench of Justices MR Shah and Krishna Murari said after having considered the facts of the case and upon appreciation of evidence of the eyewitnesses and other material adduced by the prosecution, "we are of the view that Trial Court wrongly convicted the Appellants (doctor and his mother) and the High Court was also not justified in upholding the conviction of the Appellants under Sections 306 (abetment of suicide) and 498A IPC (harassment for dowry)".
It set aside the impugned judgment of the high court dated January 31, 2022 as well as the order of the trial court of March 26, 2021, calling them unsustainable.
The top court said, "It is to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide.
Merely on the allegation of harassment without their being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable". The bench said a bare perusal of the impugned judgment indicates the high court erred in recording the finding that there is sufficient evidence for convicting the appellants under Section 306 IPC losing sight of the fact that there exists no evidence on record indicating that the deceased was harassed by them just before her death.
"It is well-settled that not only there has to be evidence of continuous harassment, but there should be cogent evidence to establish a positive action by the accused which should more or less be proximate to the time of occurrence, which action can said to have led or compelled the person to commit suicide," the court said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
