The Gujarat High Court has quashed the FIR lodged against a school trustee and teacher from Surat for allegedly abetting a student's suicide. The student, an 18-year-old in 12th grade at Samarpan School, had ended his life by jumping from the 11th floor of an apartment in 2016.

The Court held that disciplinary action taken for the welfare of the student cannot be construed as grounds for abetment of suicide.

Justice Divyesh Joshi, presiding over the case, while expounding on the question as to whether the applicants instigated the deceased to commit suicide or not, observed, “To attract the first clause [of Section 107 IPC], there must be instigation in some form on the part of the accused to cause the deceased to commit suicide. Hence, the accused must have 'mens rea' to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. The act of instigation must be of such intensity that it is intended to push the deceased to such a position under which he or she has no choice but to commit suicide.”

“Such instigation must be in close proximity to the act of committing suicide. In the present case, taking the contents of the FIR and the statements of the witnesses as correct, it is impossible to conclude that the applicants instigated the deceased to commit suicide by way of so-called humiliation meted out to the deceased. By no stretch of the imagination, the alleged acts of the applicants can amount to instigation to commit suicide,” the Justice Divyesh added.

According to the complaint, the deceased had expressed dissatisfaction to the school trustee regarding the newly hired teaching staff, which, according to students, did not meet the standards set by the previous staff.

Chandresh, a teacher, overheard a conversation among students criticizing the new staff. He reprimanded them for their complaint and slapped one student, further threatening others with physical punishment, as outlined in the complaint.

On January 21st, an incident of commotion occurred behind the bench of deceased, leading to the accused teacher slapping the student three times. When the deceased questioned the reason for the punishment, the teacher reportedly replied that he would provide an explanation by evening.

Despite the student's persistence, the teacher allegedly expelled him from the class and directed him to meet with the trustee. Subsequently, the student was kept on the school premises until 6 PM.

The following day, the deceased student was instructed to remain idle for two hours on the fourth floor of the school building. After this period, the trustee informed the student that his parents had been notified about his conduct. Tragically, the student died by suicide shortly thereafter.

Subsequently, a criminal case was initiated against both the school's trustee and the teacher involved.

The Court in its verdict observed, “it cannot be said that there was any intention on their part to abet the commission of suicide by one of his own students and therefore no mens rea can be attributed.”

Thus, the Court opined, “the very element of abetment is missing from the allegations levelled in the FIR and in absence of the element of abetment from the allegations, the offence under Section 306 IPC would not be attracted. Moreover, as submitted by learned Senior Advocate Mr. Pandya, the deceased was facilitated by the school management including the applicants for his achievement of getting second rank in the school and therefore it can hardly be believed that there was any intention on the part of the applicants to abet the commission of suicide by one of his scholar students.”

Considering the stipulations outlined in Sections 107 and 306 of the Indian Penal Code, alongside the judicial precedents highlighted by the Supreme Court, particularly in the case of Lalitbhai Vikramchand Parekh v. State of Gujarat, Criminal Misc. Application No.16032 of 2014, the Court observed that in instances falling under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, the presence of specific mens rea to perpetrate the offense is imperative.

Furthermore, the Court emphasized that the accused must have played a direct and active role, directly contributing to the deceased's decision to commit suicide. In other words, mere evidence of "instigation" or "initial assistance" by the accused is insufficient to establish culpability in such cases.

The Court, 'conscious of the pain and suffering of the complainant who is the mother of the deceased boy', stated, “It is also very unfortunate that a young boy has lost his life but as observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Geo Verghese (supra), the sympathy of the Court and pain and suffering of the complainant, cannot translate into a legal remedy, much less a criminal prosecution.”

Accordingly, the Court allowed the applications and quashed and set aside the FIR being.

Case Title: Chandresh Vasantbhai Malani v. State of Gujarat

LL Citation: 2024 Livelaw (Guj) 41

Click Here To Read / Download Judgement