Read Time: 11 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court on December 10, 2024 said that mere allegations of harassment are insufficient to establish guilt in a case of abetment of suicide as for a conviction, there must be evidence of a positive act by the accused, closely linked to the time of the incident, that compelled or drove the victim to end her life.

"The prosecution must demonstrate an active or direct action by the accused that led the deceased to take his/her own life. The element of mens rea cannot simply be presumed or inferred; it must be evident and explicitly discernible. Without this, the foundational requirement for establishing abetment under the law is not satisfied, underscoring the necessity of a deliberate and conspicuous intent to provoke or contribute to the act of suicide," a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B Varale said.

The court partly allowed an appeal filed by Jayedeepsinh Pravinsinh Chavda and others against the Gujarat High Court's order of May 9, 2024, which rejected their criminal revision application and refused to discharge them in the case related to offences under Section 306, 498A and 114 of the IPC.

According to the FIR lodged on April 18, 2021, the deceased wife of Chavda was allegedly harassed mentally and physically since the marriage in 2009. Around twelve months before the alleged incident, the deceased had informed her father – the informant that the appellant-accused had sold her ornaments given to her as streedhan during her marriage, and whenever she demanded the return of it, she was physically and mentally harassed.

Examining the matter, the court said the appellants’ argument that the deceased had not made a single complaint for cruelty or harassment against the appellants in the 12 years of marriage could not be sustained.

"Merely because she did not file any complaint for twelve years does not guarantee that there was no instance of cruelty or harassment," the bench said.

From perusal of the FIR, findings of the Investigating Officer in the chargesheet as well as the statements of the deceased’s cousins recorded during investigation prima facie indicate that the deceased was subjected to physical as well as mental cruelty by her husband and the in-laws, the bench noted.

The court pointed out there was also a specific instance related to the alleged selling of the gold ornaments and subsequent cruelty upon the demand for return made by the deceased.

"A preliminary analysis, as required during the stage of charge-framing, points towards the probable commission of the offence of cruelty as provided under section 498-A, IPC," the bench said.

Hence, the appellants cannot be discharged for offence under section 498-A, IPC and should be charged with and tried for the same, the bench held.

However, for a conviction under Section 306 of the IPC, the bench said, it is a well-established legal principle that the presence of clear mens rea—the intention to abet the act—is essential.

The court also pointed out that to bring a conviction under section 306, IPC it is necessary to establish a clear mens rea to instigate or push the deceased to commit suicide. It requires certain such act, omission, creation of circumstances, or words which would incite or provoke another person to commit suicide.

"If the accused's actions were intended only to harass or express anger, they might not meet the threshold for abetment or investigation. Each case demands a careful evaluation of facts, considering the accused’s intent and its impact on the victim," the bench said.

On a careful and close consideration of the facts and the material on record in the present case, the bench said, there appeared no proximate link between the alleged facts, instances of harassment and her subsequent death by hanging.

The alleged incident of selling of gold ornaments and subsequent physical and mental harassment, as alleged, occurred almost a year before the FIR was registered at the instance of the father of the deceased. Even the statements of the deceased’s cousins only mention instances which occurred a year prior to the death of the deceased, the bench highlighted.

"Further, selling of gold ornaments and the same was followed by discord and harassment upon their demand, even if true, do not reflect any intention to instigate, incite or provoke the deceased to commit suicide. Mere harassment and such issues between the wife and her husband along with the in-laws do not appear to create a scenario where she was left with no option other than to end her life. There is, therefore, absence of mens rea to instigate suicide of the deceased persons," the bench said.

Therefore, prima facie, the bench added, it appeared that the appellants did not have the requisite mens rea and neither did they commit any positive or direct act or omission to instigate or aid in the commission of suicide by the deceased.

The court held that the appellants could not be charged under Section 306, IPC and thus deserved to be discharged of the same.

Accordingly, the bench discharged the appellants from the charges under Section 306 of the IPC. However, it upheld the charge against the appellants under Section 498A of the IPC.

Case Title: Jayedeepsinh Pravinsinh Chavda & Ors Vs State of Gujarat