Legal Reference Library

In State Of Maharastra vs Ramesh More & Ors, the Bombay High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the State of Maharashtra against a trial court order acquitting the accused in an abetment of suicide case. Justice PN Deshmukh upheld the order by the Additional Sessions Judge of the trial court in a judgement dated May 11, 2017.

Bombay High Court has recently acquitted an Accused who challenged his conviction under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code [Subhash Purandas Pawar vs State Of Maharashtra]. Originally he was charged with the Offences under Sections 306 IPC and 498A. He has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- for S.498A. He was acquitted of offence under Section 306 of IPC . The Prosecution Case was that the Accused’s wife committed suicide because of his Cruelty with a view to coerce her to meet unlawful demand of Rs.50,000/-. The trial Court considered the evidence which was brought and recorded findings that the prosecution failed to prove that the victim had committed suicide or that the accused had abetted the committing of suicide by the victim. It also held that it was not proved that the Victim was subjected to cruelty of such a nature which would drive her to commit suicide or to cause grave injury to herself. The trial Court, however, held...

The high court of Bombay at Goa has held that a trial court cannot direct framing of charges against an accused for abetment to commit suicide and alternatively for murder. The order comes in the case of an accused arrested for allegedly being responsible for the death of a youth at Valpoi in 2014. Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/goa/HC-Cant-frame-same-person-for-murder-and-suicide-abetment/articleshow/52719326.cms

A suicide note alone is not proof enough to charge someone with abetting a suicide, the Bombay high court has said in a decision that is likely to spur a debate on the contentious issue. The HC ruled last week that one cannot be held guilty of abetment “merely because a relationship fails”. There must be evidence of the accused having “intentionally aided, or instigated” the victim to end his or her life. The ruling came while the court was hearing an appeal filed by the state against a recent sessions court judgment. According to the state’s plea, the lower court had erred in acquitting Mumbai resident Anurag Singh, whom police had charged under section 306 and section 495 of the IPC for abetment and concealment of marriage. The prosecution said despite being already married, Singh had made a false promise of marriage to the deceased, who was a third-year college student. One day the young woman came to his house unannounced and discovered that he was living with his wife. She t...

Bombay High Court has held Kishor Dattatraya Shinde vs. State of Maharashtra, held that mere harassment alone, would not amount to abetting a person to commit suicide. Division bench comprising of Justice Ranjit More and Justice V. L. Achliya, there has to be a direct or clear intention or means rea to commit the offence to attract the provisions of section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner in this application was a senior official of the deceased. He was accused of the offence under Section 306 of the IPC. The allegations made in the FIR was that the senior officers of deceased were harassing him and he was not given leave and because of that he committed suicide. In the suicide note, deceased has stated that the petitioner and two others made him suffer hardships. Perusing the FIR as well as suicide-note, the Court said that it does not contain anything to suggest that the Applicant or other officers had instigated the deceased to commit suicide or engaged in conspiracy to...