Whether refusal to marry constitutes instigation or abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC?

Facts

The appellant, Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi, was charged under Sections 417, 376, and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). He was acquitted by the trial court but convicted under Sections 417 (cheating) and 306 (abetment of suicide) by the High Court after an appeal from the State of Karnataka. The deceased, Suvarna, aged 21, had been in love with the appellant for 8 years. She committed suicide by consuming poison after he refused to marry her, despite earlier promises allegedly made before a community meeting. Two dying declarations were recorded, but neither provided evidence of instigation or physical relationship on the appellant’s part.

Contentions of the Appellant

The appellant argued that no evidence supported the allegations of cheating or abetment of suicide. He maintained that he had not instigated or provoked the deceased to take her life. The trial court’s findings, which acquitted him due to insufficient evidence, were emphasized.

Contentions of the Respondent

The State contended that the appellant deceived the deceased by falsely promising marriage, leading her to take the extreme step of suicide. The High Court found this sufficient to convict him for abetment of suicide and cheating.

Issues

1. Whether the appellant’s refusal to marry the deceased constitutes instigation or abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.
2. Whether the promise to marry, followed by refusal, amounts to cheating under Section 417 IPC.
3. Whether the High Court was justified in overturning the trial court’s acquittal based on the available evidence.

Observations/Findings by the Supreme Court

1. The Court observed that abetment requires a positive act of instigation, incitement, or intentional aiding, none of which was evident in this case.
2. The refusal to marry, though hurtful, was not a direct act encouraging the deceased to commit suicide.
3. Broken relationships, while emotionally distressing, do not inherently imply instigation.
4. The Court emphasized the absence of evidence for any physical relationship or specific actions by the appellant that led the deceased to consume poison.

Principle of the Case

For a conviction under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear mens rea and a direct or active act of instigation leading to suicide. Mere refusal to marry, even after a promise, does not constitute abetment or cheating unless proven with specific acts of deceit or encouragement.

Final Order

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment and reinstated the trial court’s acquittal of the appellant under all charges. The appeal was allowed, with no costs.

Impact on Public Law and Order

This judgment underscores the need for clear evidence of instigation or mens rea in cases of abetment to suicide. It reinforces the principle that emotional setbacks, including relationship issues, should not be criminalized unless accompanied by clear intent and actions. This ruling is likely to prevent the misuse of abetment provisions and ensure a fair balance between emotional distress and criminal culpability.

Case Citation

Supreme Court of India
Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi v. State of Karnataka
Criminal Appeal No. 551 of 2012
Date of Judgment: November 29, 2024