Mere demand of money not grounds for suicide’s instigation: HC

The Bombay high court has ruled that the mere demand for money does not constitute instigation or abetment to suicide. This decision came in a case involving a Vasai resident Arunarani R Poddar, who was charged with abetting the suicide of a man with whom she was in a relationship

Mumbai: The Bombay high court has ruled that the mere demand for money does not constitute instigation or abetment to suicide. This decision came in a case involving a Vasai resident Arunarani R Poddar, who was charged with abetting the suicide of a man with whom she was in a relationship.

HT Image

“Mere demand of money would not constitute instigation or abetment to suicide. There should be intention to provoke, instigate, or encourage the doing of an act by the latter,” a bench of Justices Prakash D Naik and N R Borkar held.

The case unfolded after Sunil B. Bishnoi, the deceased’s brother, filed a report on March 5, 2022, with the Navghar Police Station. The deceased, who was in a relationship with Poddar, left behind a suicide note attributing his decision to end his life to Poddar’s repeated demands for money. Additionally, voice messages retrieved during the investigation supported the claims made in the note.

Poddar argued that even if the allegations were true, they did not meet the legal threshold for constituting an offence under Section 306 (abetment of suicide) of the IPC. The defence highlighted discrepancies between the suicide note and the voice messages and noted a significant time lapse between the last communication and the suicide.

The court acknowledged the relationship between the deceased and Poddar and noted that her requests for money were primarily for daily expenses. The court emphasised that for an offence under Section 306 to be established, there must be clear evidence of intent to provoke or instigate suicide, with a close temporal link between the alleged instigation and the act of suicide.

Consequently, the court found that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case against Poddar. As a result, the proceedings were quashed and set aside.