01Facts
The deceased, Arijit Samaddar, married Petitioner No. 1 on December 1, 2021
p. 1Petitioner No. 1 left the matrimonial home in February 2022, citing her husband’s refusal to treat a medical condition (epidermoid cysts) and his indifferent attitude
p. 2On July 2, 2022, she briefly returned to collect her belongings
p. 2On September 19, 2022—nearly two and a half months after their last contact—the deceased committed suicide by hanging
p. 2, 6A suicide note was found blaming the petitioners and their relatives for his mental pain and alleging they circulated a picture of his private parts
pp. 5-6The police filed a charge sheet under Sections 306/506/34 of the IPC. The petitioners moved the High Court to quash the proceedings
p. 102Issues
i.1. Whether the allegations in the FIR and the contents of the suicide note satisfy the ingredients of "abetment" under Section 107 of the IPC to sustain a charge under Section 306 IPC
p. 7ii.2. Whether there exists a proximate "live link" or nexus between the acts of the petitioners and the suicide committed two and a half months after their last meeting
p. 3, 6iii.3. Whether the proceedings under Section 506 IPC are maintainable in the absence of evidence of a threat intended to cause alarm
p. 1303Law Applied
Section 306 of the IPC (abetment of suicide) and Section 107 of the IPC, which defines abetment as instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid
p. 7Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, defining "instigation" as a provincial urge or provocation to do an act
p. 8State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal, which warned against prosecuting for ordinary matrimonial discord where the victim is hypersensitive
p. 9Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State, emphasizing the requirement of mens rea
p. 9Shenbagavalli v. Inspector of Police, establishing that a significant time gap and lack of direct contact between the alleged harassment and the suicide negate the charge of abetment
pp. 11-13Section 506 IPC regarding criminal intimidation
p. 13Provisions in the judgment · 5 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 34Section 107Section 306Section 506
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 482
04Reasoning
The court observed that for a conviction under Section 306 IPC, there must be a clear mens rea and an active act intended to push the deceased to suicide
p. 9, 13In the present case, the Petitioner had no physical or verbal contact with the deceased after July 2, 2022—more than two months before the suicide
p. 6, 12The court reasoned that the suicide note mentioned frustration over matrimonial discord but failed to detail any specific act of instigation or intentional aid by the petitioners
pp. 7-8Following the precedent in Shenbagavalli, the court noted that even hurtful remarks (such as questioning manhood) do not constitute abetment, especially when there is no proximity of time between the remark and the incident
p. 12, 14Since the ingredients of Section 107 were absent and the deceased appeared to have reacted with disproportionate sensitivity to common marital friction, the court found no legal basis for the trial
p. 10, 1405Holding
The court answered the issues in the negative, holding that the materials on record, even if taken as true, do not establish the offence of abetment to suicide or criminal intimidation
pp. 13-14The court held that continuing the prosecution would be an abuse of the process of law. Consequently, the High Court allowed the revisional application and quashed the proceeding being GR Case no. 3892 of 2022 pending before the Sessions Judge, Barasat
p. 14Original Court PDF
SHREYA BASAK AND ANOTHERvsSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
