Supreme Court

State of West Bengal Vs. Indrajit Kundu and Ors.

MANU/SC/1442/2019

18.10.2019

Criminal

Word uttered in fit of anger or emotion without intending consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation

Present appeal is preferred by the State of West Bengal through Principal Secretary, Home Department, aggrieved by the judgment passed by the High Court. By the impugned order, the Respondents-Accused were discharged of the charge framed against them under Section 306 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). On the complaint of the de facto complainant, a case was registered against Respondents under Section 306 of IPC and thereafter charge-sheet was filed.

From the material placed on record, it is clear that Respondents are sought to be proceeded for charge under Section 306/34 of IPC mainly relying on the suicide letters written by the deceased girl and the statements recorded during the investigation. The suicide committed by the victim cannot be said to be the result of any action on part of Respondents nor can it be said that commission of suicide by the victim was the only course open to her due to action of the Respondents. There was no goading or solicitation or insinuation by any of the Respondents to the victim to commit suicide.

In the case of Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of M.P. and Anr. Present Court while considering utterances like "to go and die" during the quarrel between husband and wife, uttered by husband held that utterances of such words are not direct cause for committing suicide. In such circumstances, in the aforesaid judgment this Court held that Sessions Judge erred in summoning the Appellant to face the trial and quashed the proceedings.

Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the Accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.

It is clear from the material on record that, there was no goading or solicitation or insinuation by any of the Respondents to the victim to commit suicide. There is no merit in present appeal so as to interfere with the well reasoned judgment of the High Court. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.

Relevant

Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of M.P. and Anr. MANU/SC/1229/1995

Tags : Suicide Discharge Legality

Share :