Angry remark ‘go away and die’ in a quarrel does not amount to abetment of suicide: Kerala HC

The Kerala High Court has clarified that casual or angry remarks made during a quarrel, in the absence of the required mens rea, cannot be construed as abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

Justice C Pratheep Kumar made the observation while allowing a criminal revision petition filed against a Sessions Court order that had declined to discharge the accused and proposed framing charges under Sections 306 (abetment of suicide) and 204 (destruction of evidence) of the IPC.

The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was in a relationship with the second accused, who later died by suicide. According to the case, when the deceased found out that the petitioner was planning to marry another woman and confronted him, he allegedly scolded her and said, “go away and die”. The prosecution claimed that the remark caused mental distress, eventually leading to her suicide.

Counsel for the petitioner argued that the statement was made during a heated exchange and lacked any intention to instigate or encourage suicide. It was therefore submitted that the essential ingredients required to attract an offence under Section 306 IPC were not satisfied.

The Court analysed Section 306 along with Section 107 of the IPC, which defines abetment as instigation, conspiracy or intentional aiding of an offence. Relying on settled Supreme Court judgments, including Sanju Alias Sanjay Singh Sengar v. State of M.P [2002 KHC 1270] and Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of M.P [1995 KHC 3306], the Court pointed out that instigation necessarily involves incitement accompanied by a guilty intention.

The judgment also referred to Cyriac v. SI of Police [2005 KHC 1021], which held that even abusive or humiliating conduct would not amount to abetment unless it reasonably indicates an intention to provoke suicide.

Elaborating on the principle, the Court observed: “What is important is the intention of the accused and not what is felt by the deceased. In the instant case also, the words, ‘go away and die’ made by the petitioner were in the midst of a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the deceased, in the heat of passion, without having any intention to instigate the deceased to commit suicide and as such, the offence under Section 306 IPC is not made out.”

The Court further noted that once the offence under Section 306 IPC was not established, the charge under Section 204 IPC could not stand either. Consequently, the High Court set aside the Sessions Court’s order and allowed the criminal revision petition, discharging the petitioner from offences punishable under Sections 306 and 204 of the IPC.
(With Live Law Inputs)