Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Santosh Sakharam Kamble and Milind Devaji Kamble, were convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri in Sessions Case No. 40 of 2021 for offences under Sections 306 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). They were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of four years and fine for Section 306, and one year rigorous imprisonment and fine for Section 506. The prosecution case was that the deceased, Bhikaji Kamble, had illicit relations with a lady in the same village, and the appellants, being residents of the same village, suspected this and harassed him. On 07/04/2021, they assaulted him, and on 09/04/2021, they threatened him to leave the village or be killed. Consequently, Bhikaji committed suicide by hanging, leaving a suicide note. The appellants appealed against the conviction. The High Court of Bombay examined the evidence, including the suicide note which did not name the appellants or attribute any specific instigation. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove that the appellants instigated or actively participated in driving the deceased to commit suicide. The mere suspicion of illicit relations and harassment, without direct instigation, is insufficient to sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC. The evidence for criminal intimidation under Section 506 was also found lacking. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Abetment of Suicide - Section 306 IPC - Instigation - The conviction under Section 306 IPC requires proof of direct instigation or active participation by the accused which led the deceased to commit suicide. Mere harassment or suspicion of illicit relations, without evidence of instigation, is insufficient to sustain a conviction. The court held that the prosecution failed to establish that the appellants instigated or actively participated in driving the deceased to commit suicide. (Paras 1-19) B) Criminal Law - Criminal Intimidation - Section 506 IPC - Threat - The conviction under Section 506 IPC requires proof of threat causing alarm. The court found that the alleged threats were not sufficiently proved and the evidence was inconsistent. (Paras 1-19) C) Evidence Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Suicide Note - The suicide note did not name the appellants or attribute any specific act of instigation. The court held that the contents of the suicide note did not support the prosecution case. (Paras 1-19)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 306 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellants acquitted of all charges. Bail bonds cancelled.
Law Points
- Abetment of suicide requires direct instigation or active participation
- mere harassment or suspicion of illicit relations insufficient
- Section 306 IPC
- Section 506 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
