Dismissed

Praveen Kumar v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Feb 2014CRM-A/760/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana examined an application for leave to appeal in a case of alleged abetment to suicide. The court upheld the trial court's acquittal, holding that mere disputes or threats in a suicide note without corroborative evidence do not establish abetment.

What did the court decide?

Application for leave to appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. dismissed; accompanying criminal appeal failed.

Praveen Kumar Vs State of Punjab and… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl. Misc. No.A-760-MA of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision : February 17, 2014

Parveen Kumar

... Petitioner

vs.

State of Punjab and others

¶7

... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶9

Present: Mr. Surinder Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Surinder Gupta, J

¶11

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking leave to appeal under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C.

¶12

In case FIR bearing No.160 dated 4.6.2004, registered for offence punishable under Section 306 IPC at Police Station Civil Lines, Amritsar, the respondent faced trial and was acquitted vide judgment dated 14.7.2012 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar.

¶13

Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that on 4.6.2004, Yogesh Sharma son of Nikka Ram committed suicide by hanging himself with the ceiling fan during the night hours of 4.6.2004 and 5.6.2004. The police found the suicide note from the pocket of the deceased, incorporated in para 18 of the judgments which reads as follows :-

¶14

“Dimple Kumar is responsible for my death. He runs a Karyana shop in front of Improvement Trust under the name & style of Dimple Karyana Store. I had put four committees of Rs.1,60,000/- with Dimple Kumar. I had withdrawn one of the committee regarding which Dimple Kumar issued him a cheque of Rs.29,000/-. Dimple Kumar was refusing to pay the amount of remaining committees. That he has threatened to kill me. He had also issued threats to me from his friend in the police at Batala namely Jarnail Singh and Dimple Kumar also rings me up through his wife, therefore, he is solely responsible for my death. As such, action be taken against him so that my soul may rest in peace. Brother Parveen you must take revenge of my death. Sanjay Sir, I have worked honestly in your Hotel for five years, therefore, kindly make payment to my family members and accused should be punished for his offence.”

¶15

Kumar Deepak 2014.03.12 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

-2-

¶17

Crl. Misc. No.A-760-MA of 2012 (O&M)

¶18

On perusal of the evidence, the trial court observed that there has been no abetment on the part of the respondent for commission of suicide by Yogesh Sharma.

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that in the suicide note the deceased has specifically named and blamed the respondent No.2 for his suicide. The respondent No.2 had not paid him the due amount of committee and had also given him threats. Parveen Kumar brother of the deceased has also supported the prosecution case but the trial court has wrongly ignored very vital piece of evidence that has come on file.

¶20

The main and only evidence led by the prosecution was the suicide note left by the deceased stating therein that he had contributed money in the committees with the respondent No.2. He had drawn one committee regarding which the respondent issued him a cheque. He was refusing him to pay the amount of remaining committees and also gave threats to kill him.

¶21

Besides this evidence, the prosecution has examined Parveen Kumar petitioner who had no direct knowledge of any threat given by the respondent.

¶22

Now the question which require consideration is as to whether money dealing in between the deceased and the respondent or giving threats to the deceased makes out a case of abetment to commit suicide.

¶23

In the suicide note, the deceased has referred that he was having four committees of `1,60,000/- with the respondent No.2. He had withdrawn amount of one committee and the respondent No.2 was not paying him the amount of the committee. This fact was also elaborated by the police during investigation of the case. Even if it is believed that the deceased had some dispute regarding the amount of committee with the respondent it does not ipso facto amounts to abetment to the deceased to take the extreme step of comitting suicide. Parveen Kumar brother of the deceased while appearing as PW-2 had stated that no threats were given by the respondent to the deceased in his presence. As per suicide note, the threats were given to the deceased on telephone but no evidence in this regard has come on file.

¶24

The death is unfortunate particularly when it is untimely and tragic. However, before fixing the liability of abetment some better quality evidence was required to make out that the deceased was instigated to commit suicide. In the matter of money dispute; family dispute; business dispute; failure in love affair etc. a person has to be morally sound and brave. If instead of facing the hard realities of life he commits suicide, while leaving a suicide note like Ex.P1 left in this case,

¶25

Kumar Deepak 2014.03.12 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶26

-3-

¶27

Crl. Misc. No.A-760-MA of 2012 (O&M)

¶28

the liability for abetment cannot be foisted on the person named in the suicide note without any corroboration and appreciation of evidence.

¶29

In case Gangula Mohan Reddy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2010) 1 SCC 750, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in para 20 and 21 observed as follows :-

¶30

“20. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained.

¶31

21. The intention of the Legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this court is clear that in order to convict a person under section 306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide.”

¶32

In para 16 of the aforesaid judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has referred to to the case State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal and Another (1994) 1 SCC 73 and observed as follows :-

¶33

“..... this Court has cautioned that the Court should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trail for the purpose of finding whether the cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end the life by committing suicide. If it appears to the Court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and difference in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance, discord and difference were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the Court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty.

¶34

In the instant case, the deceased, as per his suicide note, has some financial dealings with respondent No.2. He appeared to be a sensitive person,

¶35

Kumar Deepak 2014.03.12 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶36

-4-

¶37

Crl. Misc. No.A-760-MA of 2012 (O&M)

¶38

who took extreme step of ending his life due to money dispute with respondent No.2. The trial court has elaborately dealt with the law on the point and the evidence that has come on file while reaching the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove that the respondent abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. I find no legal or factual infirmity in the judgment dated 14.7.2012 so as to grant leave to appeal.

¶39

In view of the above discussion, the application for leave to appeal is

¶40

dismissed.

¶41

Consequently, the accompanying appeal also fails.

¶42

February 17, 2014 (Surinder Gupta) deepak Judge

¶43

Kumar Deepak 2014.03.12 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Praveen Kumar v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen Kumar v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amrik Singh Vs State of Punjab

Joginder Singh Vs Shiv Dev Singh

Avtar Singh Vs State of Punjab

Liyakat Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Amandeep Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jasvir Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.