Wife Filing Criminal Case Against Spouse & In-Laws Is Only Taking Recourse Of Legal Remedy, Not Abetting Husband To Commit Suicide: MP High Court
Stating that the act of the wife who filed a criminal case against the husband and in-laws for cruelty cannot be termed as an act that amounts to abetting the husband to commit suicide, the Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that the complainant-wife shouldn't be punished for taking the recourse of a legal remedy.The single judge bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia also added that a...
Stating that the act of the wife who filed a criminal case against the husband and in-laws for cruelty cannot be termed as an act that amounts to abetting the husband to commit suicide, the Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that the complainant-wife shouldn't be punished for taking the recourse of a legal remedy.
The single judge bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia also added that a person committing suicide, since he is hypersensitive, cannot be termed as an outcome of abetment. If a person takes recourse to the legal remedy available to them after an offence has been committed, it cannot be considered an illegal act synonymous with abetting the deceased to commit suicide, the court laid down in clear terms.
“…By lodging the FIR, the applicants had not committed any illegal act and since a victim has a solitary option of approaching the Police and thereafter to the Court for redressal of her grievances and if the suicide committed by the deceased on the pretext that he has been falsely framed in offence under Section 498-A, 406, 294, 506, 34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, then it cannot be said that the widow of the deceased or her parents had abetted the deceased to commit suicide”, the bench sitting at Jabalpur clarified.
To elucidate how the term 'instigation' mentioned in Section 107 of IPC [Abetment] won't be applicable to the facts of the case, reliance was placed on Praveen Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal & Anr. (2012), State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal & Anr., (1994), Amit Kapur v. Ramesh Chander & Anr. (2012) and Gangula Mohan Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2010).
“The word “instigate” denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action or to stimulate or incite. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite, urge or encourage to do an act”, the court further observed after referring to the above precedents.
The veracity of allegations made in the FIR could have been determined at the stage of evidence by the trial court, the court added while quashing the FIR registered in Suatala Police Station (Narsinghpur District) and consequential proceedings against the wife and her parents for offences under Section 306 and 34 of IPC.
On 06.05.2023, the applicant-wife had lodged an FIR against her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law alleging torture and harassment for paying less dowry. In the complaint, it was also alleged that they demanded an additional dowry of Rs 5 lakhs, a gold chain and a vehicle for the complainant to keep staying in her matrimonial home. As per the applicant-wife's version, since she did not pay heed to those demands, they even pressured her for divorce. Later, when she couldn't meet the in-law's demands, she was subjected to physical abuse and thrown out of the matrimonial home, which was submitted by the applicant's wife while lodging the FIR.
According to the applicants, on 25.05.2023, the husband consumed poison and committed suicide. The father of the deceased and other witnesses had then alleged that the deceased committed suicide because the wife lodged a false case against him.
For Applicants: Advocate Sankalp Kochar
For Respondent State: Panel Lawyer Dilip Parihar
For Respondent No.2: Advocate Ravi Shankar Patel
Case No: Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 14371 of 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP)110