Case Note & Summary
The judgment concerns two criminal writ petitions challenging similar orders passed by trial courts framing an alternative charge under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in addition to charges under Sections 498-A and 302 read with 34 IPC. In Criminal Writ Petition No.701 of 2006, the prosecution had also prayed for framing an alternative charge under Section 304-B along with Section 306 IPC, but the court framed charge only under Section 306 read with 34 IPC. The impugned orders were passed on applications filed by the prosecution. The common question raised was whether the accused could be tried for offences under both Sections 302 and 306 IPC, which are distinct offences with different ingredients, and whether that would cause prejudice to the accused in propounding his defence. The petitioners argued that the prosecution must take a positive stand whether it is a case of murder or suicide, and cannot say that the accused murdered the deceased and alternatively that the deceased committed suicide abetted by the accused. The court agreed, holding that the two offences are mutually inconsistent and cannot be tried together. The court allowed the petitions and quashed the alternative charge under Section 306 IPC.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Framing of Charges - Alternative Charge - Sections 302 and 306 IPC - The court held that charges under Section 302 (murder) and Section 306 (abetment of suicide) are mutually inconsistent and cannot be framed alternatively as they have altogether different ingredients. The prosecution must take a definite stand whether the case is one of murder or suicide. Framing such alternative charge would cause prejudice to the accused in propounding his defence. (Paras 2-3) B) Criminal Law - Abetment of Suicide - Section 306 IPC - Alternative Charge - The court held that an alternative charge under Section 306 IPC cannot be framed in addition to a charge under Section 302 IPC, as the two offences are distinct and the prosecution cannot simultaneously allege that the accused murdered the deceased and that the deceased committed suicide abetted by the accused. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an alternative charge under Section 306 IPC can be framed in addition to a charge under Section 302 IPC, given that the two offences are distinct and mutually inconsistent.
Final Decision
The court allowed both petitions and quashed the alternative charge under Section 306 IPC framed by the trial courts in addition to the charge under Section 302 IPC.
Law Points
- Alternative charge under Section 306 IPC cannot be framed alongside Section 302 IPC as they are mutually inconsistent
- distinct offences with different ingredients
- prosecution must take a definite stand whether it is a case of murder or suicide
- framing alternative charge causes prejudice to accused in propounding defence
