Category Archives: suicide

Harassment alone cannot constitute abetment or instigation (for suicide). Husband & in-laws exonerated in ipc306 ipc34. Raj HC


Image result for rajasthan HC images

//// Suffice it to state that for the offence of abetment to suicide if it is the case of the prosecution that the victim was instigated to commit suicide on account of being troubled then harassment has to be to such an extent that she was left with no option other than to kill herself, the test of proximity between the date when the victim took the extreme step and trouble inducing incitement to do the act has to be established. Harassment by itself cannot constitute abetment or instigation. Instigation means active stimulus.

In the instant case, none has established. The conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 IPC thus cannot be sustained. ///

This case once again proves that jail sentence IF ANY in a 498a cases is ONLY when the wife is DEAD and even there IF the abetment is NOT proven, then husband and family are exonerated from the suicide per se

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Bhagirath And Ors vs State on 6 February, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B.

Criminal Appeal No. 898/2015

  1. Bhagirath S/o Bhau Ram by caste Jat
  2. Bhau Ram S/o Hanuwata Ram, by caste Jat
  3. Smt.Shanti Devi W/o Bhau Ram, by caste Jat All Resident of Bodwa, P.S.Kuchera, district Nagaur. —-Appellants

Versus State of Rajasthan —-Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr.Nishant Bora with Ms.Chhavi Kalla

For Respondent(s) : Mr.O.P.Rathi, PP

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG

Judgment 06/02/2019

  1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
  2. Bhagirath and his parents Bhau Ram and Shanti Devi have been convicted for offences punishable under Sections 306/34, 498-A/34 and 201 IPC. For the offence of abetment to commit suicide they have been sentenced to undergo SI for a period of seven years and to pay fine in sum of ?5000/-, in default to undergo SI for six months. For the offence punishable under Section 498A/34 IPC they have been sentenced to undergo SI for two years and pay fine in sum of ?2000/-, in default to undergo SI for three months. For the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC they have been sentenced to undergo SI for one year and pay fine in sum of ?1000/-, in default to undergo SI for one month. All sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
  3. Bhagirath has already undergone a sentence of 6 years 8 months and 17 days as on 24.1.2019. His parents have undergone a sentence of 11 months and are on bail. Bhagirath is still in jail.
  4. It is the case of the prosecution that Bhagirath’s wife named Santosh committed suicide in her matrimonial house on 6.5.2012. Since it is not in dispute that Santosh poured kerosene oil on herself and set herself on fire resulting in extensive burn injuries and due to shock caused thereby she died, I note only such evidence which would be relevant to sustain the charge for having abetted Santosh’s suicide. Abetment being in the form of instigation by demanding dowry that Santosh was left with no alternative but to end her life.
  5. For the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC, I note that there is evidence of the place where victim set herself on fire was tampered with, in that, using cow-dung and mud an attempt was made to re-plaster the place.
  6. I note the testimony of the parents and relatives of Santosh on the issue of dowry demand and harassment.
  7. PW-2 Mohan Ram, a cousin of Santosh deposed that marriage of Santosh was solemnized eight years back. She joined company of her husband after two years of the marriage. After a year or two of joining her husband in her matrimonial house, his sister was troubled on account of dowry. Two children were born to Santosh. On the 4th of the month when his sister died the ceremony of the maternal-uncle of the girl to give gifts to her was held and for which his sister had come to the parental house. On the 5th his sister returned to her matrimonial house.
  8. The next witness is PW-6 Chhoti Devi, the mother of Santosh. She deposed that her daughter was married to Bhagirath and at the time of the marriage dowry was given in sum of ?2.25 lacs as also jewellery. Immediately after the marriage dowry demands were raised. ?3 lacs and a motor-cycle were demanded. On 4th her daughter had come to parental house for the ceremony of “Mayara”. Santosh told her that two days prior her in-laws had broken her mobile phone. Santosh returned to her matrimonial house on the 5th.
  9. PW-8 Ram Kishore, another cousin of Santosh deposed that after the marriage his sister was harassed on account of dowry demand. A motor-cycle and ?1 lac were demanded.
  10. PW-12 Budharam, the father of Santosh deposed that his daughter was married eight years back and at the time of marriage he gave ?2 lacs and jewellery. The in-laws demanded a motor-cycle and ?3 lacs. She was harassed for said reason. On 4 th his daughter had come to their house for the ceremony of “Mayara”.
  11. PW-17 Ramlal, the brother of Santosh also deposed that his sister was married eight years back and joined company of her husband after two years of the marriage. On account of demand of a motor-cycle and ?75,000/- his sister was being harassed by her in-laws.
  12. PW-20 Punaram, a cousin of Santosh also deposed that Santosh was married 7-8 years ago and joined company of her husband after two years. On account of dowry demand of ?75,000/- his sister used to be troubled by her in-laws. After the ceremony of “Mayara” his sister returned to the house of her in- laws on 5th and died on the 6th.
  13. PW-24 Leela Devi, a relative of Santosh deposed that Santosh was troubled by her in-laws and used to complain her that reason thereof was her parents giving less dowry.
  14. From a perusal of the testimony of the prosecution witnesses it emerges that witnesses have spoken in the plural i.e. in-laws demanding dowry without specifying whether it was the husband or the mother-in-law or the father-in-law.
  15. Relevant would it be to highlight that apart from there being a consistent stand that a motor cycle was demanded, the money demand varies between ?75,000/- to ?3 lacs. The witnesses have not stated the day or even the month when the dowry was demanded and on this aspect the learned Judge convicting the appellants has held that it would be difficult for the witnesses to remember the dates when dowry was demanded.
  16. Suffice it to state that for the offence of abetment to suicide if it is the case of the prosecution that the victim was instigated to commit suicide on account of being troubled then harassment has to be to such an extent that she was left with no option other than to kill herself, the test of proximity between the date when the victim took the extreme step and trouble inducing incitement to do the act has to be established. Harassment by itself cannot constitute abetment or instigation. Instigation means active stimulus.
  17. In the instant case, none has established. The conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 IPC thus cannot be sustained.
  18. Learned counsel for the appellants does not dispute the offence concerning plastering of place of the crime using cow-dung and mud and the presence of the appellants in the house. Effectively, the conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC is not challenged.
  19. No serious attempt has been made to question the conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 498A/34 IPC but the prayer made is that both parents Bhau Ram and Shanti Devi be sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the period which they have already undergone, which is 11 months. As regards Bhagirath, he has already undergone a sentence much beyond two years.
  20. The appeal is disposed of acquitting the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 IPC.
  21. The appellants are convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/34 IPC and 201 IPC. For both offences I inflict sentence of imprisonment for the period already undergone by both parents Bhau Ram and Shanti Devi. Sentence of two years imposed upon Bhagirath is maintained. He has already undergone a sentence much beyond two years.
  22. Bhau Ram and Shanti Devi have been admitted to bail. Their bail bonds and surety bonds are therefore discharged.
  23. Bhagirath is directed to be set free forthwith, if not required in any other case.

(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),CJ

5-Parmar/-

11 Indian #Nuclear #Scientists Died #Unnatural #Deaths in 4 Years (2009-13) ! NO ONE cried :-( :-(

In a country where even a single filmy female’s suicidal or drowning death cause candle marches and mourning, causes cases to be filed in courts seeking inquiry, 11 Indian Nuclear Scientists died and NO one cried. Later an RTI had to be filed to dig out the #s!! Many cases are still NOT closed by police !!

11 Indian Nuclear Scientists Died Unnatural Deaths in 4 Years : Government

11 Indian Nuclear Scientists Died Unnatural Deaths in 4 Years: Government

According to the latest data provided by Department of Atomic Energy, 11 scientists have died under mysterious circumstances in four years.

New Delhi:  11 nuclear scientists had unnatural deaths during a four year period from 2009-13 in the country, as per the latest data provided by Department of Atomic Energy. Out of them, eight scientists and engineers working in laboratories and research centres of the Department died in a blast or by hanging or drowning in the sea.

In its Right To Information (RTI) response to Haryana-based Rahul Sehrawat dated September 21, the department said three scientists of Nuclear Power Corporation had also died under mysterious circumstances during the period of which two allegedly committed suicide and one had died in a road accident.

The bodies of two scientists of C-group posted at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Trombay were found hanging in their residences in 2010, while one scientist of same grade posted at Rawatbhata, Rajasthan was found dead at his residence in 2012.

In one case of BARC, police claims that he committed suicide because of prolonged illness and closed the case while the remaining cases are still under investigation.

Two research fellows at died in a mysterious fire in the chemistry lab of BARC, Trombay in 2010. A scientist of F-grade was found murdered at his residence in Mumbai. It is suspected that he was strangulated but the murder accused remained untraced till date.

A D-grade scientist at Raja Ramanna Centre for Advanced Technology (RRCAT) in Indore, Madhya Pradesh also allegedly committed suicide with police closing the case.

Another scientist posted at Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu allegedly jumped into the sea to end his life in 2013 with the case is still under probe whereas a Mumbai based scientist committed suicide by hanging, with police citing personal reasons for the same.

One scientist allegedly committed suicide by jumping into Kali river in Karwar, Karnataka with police again pointing at personal reasons.

source : https://www.ndtv.co m/india-news/11-in dian-nuclear-scientists-d ied-unnatural-deaths-in- 4-years-1229793

Myna Nandhini’s husband commits suicide, blames father-in-law in note. couple married eight months back.

Myna Nandhini’s husband commits suicide, blames father-in-law in note

DECCAN CHRONICLE

Published Apr 4, 2017, 4:28 pm IST
Updated Apr 4, 2017, 4:42 pm IST
The couple got married eight months back.
Nandhini and Karthikeyan on the day of their marriage.

 Nandhini and Karthikeyan on the day of their marriage.

Mumbai: Renowned television actress ‘Myna’ Nandhini’s husband, Karthikeyan, has committed suicide by drinking poison at a lodge in Virugambakkam area of Chennai city.

On Tuesday morning, Karthikeyan, who owned a gym, was found dead by a lodge employee who peeped into Karthikeyan’s room after realising that he had not left his room for a very long time. As per reports, Karthikeyan consumed poison mixed with cold drinks and left behind a suicide letter blaming his father-in-law for provoking him to take the fatal step.

The couple had been married for only eight months and Nandhini is reportedly the second wife of Karthikeyan. The actress went back to her parents’ house after differences started to crop up between the two.

 

source

http://www.deccanchronicle.com

Harassed by wife and in-laws, man ends life. NO arrest though !! Pune Mirror !

His wife allegedly did not allow him to meet their son and filed a case of domestic violence; activists say Act needs to be made gender-neutral

The man hung himself at his residence in Pimpri on Friday, March 31. The deceased has been identified as Apoorvajeet Mitra, a resident of Vinayak Residency in Vallabh Nagar.

 

Screenshot - 4_3_2017 , 2_06_10 PM