The Allahabad High Court has made a significant ruling, discharging a wife and her parents who were accused of abetting her husband’s suicide. The court’s decision hinged on the understanding that matrimonial discord is common and doesn’t necessarily constitute instigation to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Key Aspects of the Judgment-
Routine Quarrels Aren’t Abetment: Justice Sameer Jain emphasized that casual remarks and routine quarrels in married life can’t establish intent to instigate suicide.
Mens Rea Essential: The court stressed that abetment to suicide requires mens rea (intention to drive the victim to suicide), which wasn’t evident in this case.
Context of Remarks: The alleged statement by in-laws (“Why don’t you die?”) was made in anger during a quarrel, which doesn’t meet the threshold of instigation.
Precedents Cited: The judgment referenced Supreme Court decisions like Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, highlighting that instigation involves active provocation, not mere angry remarks.
Case Details-
The husband died by suicide five days after a quarrel with his wife and in-laws.
The wife had earlier filed a criminal case against her husband and in-laws, which wasn’t withdrawn despite some settlement.
The Allahabad HC set aside the Auraiya trial court’s order dismissing the accused’s discharge plea.
These ruling underscores the court’s nuanced approach to distinguishing between common marital disputes and actionable abetment to suicide under Indian law. The Allahabad High Court has ruled that matrimonial discord alone doesn’t constitute instigation to suicide, emphasizing that routine quarrels aren’t enough to establish abetment under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). In a recent case, the court discharged a wife and her parents accused of abetting her husband’s suicide, stressing that mens rea (intention to instigate suicide) is crucial. The judgment highlights that casual remarks or ordinary marital disputes common in domestic life aren’t typically considered instigation, unless there’s direct and alarming encouragement leaving the victim no other option but to commit suicide. Supreme Court precedents like Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ude Singh v. State of Haryana reinforce that abetment requires active provocation and intent, not mere hypersensitivity to common marital discord.
