Sarcastic Remarks, Mere Harassment By Husband Due To Marital Discord Not 'Abetment Of Suicide': Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Mere harassment of a wife by her husband or in-laws due to matrimonial discord or sarcastic remarks per se does not attract the offence of abetment of suicide, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held recently.While upholding the acquittal of a man from charges under Section 306 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) after his wife set herself ablaze and died, a single bench of Justice...
Mere harassment of a wife by her husband or in-laws due to matrimonial discord or sarcastic remarks per se does not attract the offence of abetment of suicide, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held recently.
While upholding the acquittal of a man from charges under Section 306 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) after his wife set herself ablaze and died, a single bench of Justice Rajesh Sekhri observed,
"There may be various instances of matrimonial discord between husband and wife and at times wife being constantly taunted and subjected to sarcastic remarks in the house of her in-laws may be driven to commit suicide. However, such instances are normal wear and tear of a matrimonial life. In my opinion mere harassment of a wife by her husband or in-laws due to matrimonial discord or sarcastic remarks perse does not attract Section 306 of RPC (abetment of suicide)."
In her dying declaration, the respondent's wife claimed she had been married to the respondent for about 2½ years but had not been able to conceive a child. They were living separately, and her husband had left for work. When she called him requesting him to return, he refused and told her to leave. This led her to pour kerosene oil on herself and set herself on fire. In her statement she also said only her husband was responsible for pushing her to take this extreme step, and no other person was involved.
Assailing the acquittal the prosecution submitted that the trial court failed to appreciate the prosecution evidence in right prospective, as the wife set herself ablaze after being enraged by her husband's response.
Adjudicating upon the matter Justice Sekhri observed that to constitute the abetment of an offence, intentional aid and active participation of the abettor must be established.
Deliberating on the issue as to whether there was sufficient evidence to indicate that the husband was guilty of instigating, engaging in a conspiracy or intentionally aiding the victim to commit suicide, the bench observed that it is evident from the utterance of the respondent that there was neither any intention on his part nor any positive act taken by him to instigate the victim or to aid her in the commission of suicide. There was nothing to indicate that the husband anticipated that his wife would die by suicide owing to his remarks, the bench underscored.
"It is evident from the utterance of the respondent that there was neither any intention on his part nor any positive act taken by him to instigate the victim or to aid her in the commission of suicide. It appears that his intention was only to get rid of the victim and he could not have thought of any consequences that his wife would be go and commit suicide due to such utterances," the Court observed.
Pointing out to the statements of the independent witnesses examined by the prosecution, the bench noted that relations between the couple were cordial and she was leading a happy matrimonial life, however, the Court also noted that the prosecution's version indicated that the deceased victim was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance of matrimonial life.
In view of the same the Court proceeded to dismiss the appeal, while opining that there was no evidence to suggest that the respondent ever intended or participated to abet the victim's suicide.
Case Title: State of J&K Vs Tariq Hussain.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 174