Supreme Court Upholds Conviction for Abetment of Suicide in Eve-Teasing Case: Pawan Kumar vs. State of H.P. (28 April 2017)

Can persistent eve-teasing and harassment lead to a conviction for abetment of suicide? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question in the case of Pawan Kumar vs. State of H.P.. The court examined whether the accused’s actions created a situation that left the victim with no option but to end her life. This judgment clarifies the scope of abetment under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The bench comprised Justices Dipak Misra, A.M. Khanwilkar, and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, with Justice Dipak Misra authoring the opinion.

Case Background

The case involves a young woman who had previously eloped with the accused, Pawan Kumar. After his acquittal in a related case under Sections 363, 366, and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the accused began to harass and threaten her. The prosecution stated that on July 18, 2008, the accused threatened to forcibly take her away. The next day, the victim, in distress, poured kerosene on herself and set herself ablaze. She was taken to a hospital where she gave a dying declaration before succumbing to her injuries on July 24, 2008.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The trial court acquitted the accused, stating that the prosecution failed to prove his culpability under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The High Court of Himachal Pradesh reversed the trial court’s decision, convicting the accused under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentencing him to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine. The accused then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Legal Framework

The Supreme Court considered Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with abetment of suicide. Section 306 states, “If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.” The court also examined Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which defines abetment. Section 107 states, “A person abets the doing of a thing, who— First. — Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly. —Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly. — Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.”

Arguments

The appellant argued that the trial court’s judgment was correct because it had thoroughly analyzed the evidence. He contended that the High Court should not have interfered with the acquittal, especially since the trial court had valid reasons for disbelieving the dying declaration and witness testimonies. The appellant also argued that the medical evidence did not support the dying declaration.

The respondent-State argued that the High Court correctly re-evaluated the evidence and found the trial court’s conclusions to be incorrect. The State asserted that the prosecution had successfully established the accused’s active role in abetting the suicide through compelling evidence. The State contended that the High Court was right in reversing the acquittal.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

• Whether the accused can be convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The Supreme Court considered several authorities to reach its decision. These include:

• Jadunath Singh and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1971) 3 SCC 577 – Regarding the appellate court’s power to review evidence in acquittal appeals.
• Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra (1973) 2 SCC 793 – On the appellate court’s duty to scrutinize evidence de novo.
• State of Karnataka v. K. Gopalakrishna (2005) 9 SCC 291 – On setting aside an order of acquittal when findings are unreasonable.
• Girja Prasad (dead) by LRs. v. State of M.P. (2007) 7 SCC 625 – On the appellate court’s power to re-appreciate evidence.
• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ajai Kumar (2008) 3 SCC 351 – Reiterating the principles stated in State of Rajasthan v. Sohan Lal.
• Chandrappa and others v. State of Karnataka (2007) 4 SCC 415 – On the general principles regarding powers of the appellate court in acquittal appeals.
• Laxman v. State of Maharashtra (2002) 6 SCC 710 – Regarding the validity and admissibility of dying declarations.
• Atbir v. Government of NCT of Delhi (2010) 9 SCC 120 – Guidelines for admissibility of dying declarations.
• Gulzari Lal v. State of Haryana (2016) 4 SCC 583 – On the validity of a dying declaration without a medical certificate.
• Vijay Pal v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) (2015) 4 SCC 749 – On the admissibility of a dying declaration even with severe burn injuries.
• Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) (2009) 16 SCC 605 – On the concept of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC.
• Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2001) 9 SCC 618 – On the meaning of “instigate” in the context of abetment.
• Randhir Singh and another v. State of Punjab (2004) 13 SCC 129 – On the mental process involved in abetment.
• Praveen Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal & another (2012) 9 SCC 734 – On inferring instigation from circumstances.
• Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu v. State of West Bengal (2010) 1 SCC 707 – On the requirement of direct or indirect acts of incitement for abetment.
• Netai Dutta v. State of W.B. (2005) 2 SCC 659 – On the need for factual foundation in abetment cases.
• Deputy Inspector General of Police and another v. S. Samuthiram (2013) 1 SCC 598 – On the nature of eve-teasing and its impact.

Judgment

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, stating that the High Court had correctly relied on the dying declaration, the testimony of the parents, and other witnesses. The Court also noted that the accused’s actions, including constant threats and teasing, had created a situation where the victim had no option but to end her life.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court was significantly influenced by the following factors:

• The victim’s dying declaration, which clearly stated that the accused was responsible for her death.
• The consistent testimonies of the victim’s parents and the village Pradhan, who corroborated the harassment and threats.
• The proactive and continuous nature of the accused’s conduct, which created a situation where the victim felt she had no other option but to commit suicide.
• The Court’s concern for the dignity and rights of women, emphasizing that eve-teasing is a violation of fundamental rights.

Logical Reasoning

The Court reasoned that the accused’s continuous harassment and threats created a situation where the victim was left with no other option but to commit suicide. The dying declaration and witness testimonies supported this conclusion. The Court also emphasized that the accused’s conduct was proactive and directly led to the victim’s death. The Court rejected the argument that a medical certificate was necessary for the validity of the dying declaration, relying on precedents that stated that the voluntary and truthful nature of the declaration is more important.

The Court quoted, “It is evident from the handwriting that Shalu was in tremendous pain and agony when she was writing that accused would be responsible for her death.” The Court also stated, “Merely that the Doctor has not issued certificate that Shalu was fit to make statement would not in any way affect the dying declaration made by deceased on 24.07.2008, that too in the presence of PW-10 dr. Sanjay.” Furthermore, the Court observed, “In the instant case, the accused had by his acts and by his continuous course of conduct created such a situation as a consequence of which the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide.”

Key Takeaways

• Persistent eve-teasing and harassment can lead to a conviction for abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
• A dying declaration is valid even without a medical fitness certificate if it is voluntary and truthful.
• The court emphasized the need to protect women’s rights and dignity, highlighting that eve-teasing is a violation of fundamental rights.
• The judgment underscores the legal responsibility of individuals to refrain from actions that can drive another person to suicide.

Directions

No specific directions had been given by the Supreme Court in the judgment.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of the case is that persistent harassment and psychological abuse, such as eve-teasing, can constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This case reinforces the principle that a person can be held liable for creating circumstances that leave a victim with no option but to take their own life. The judgment also clarifies that a dying declaration is valid even without a medical fitness certificate, provided it is voluntary and truthful. This decision does not introduce a new legal principle but reinforces the existing law by applying it to a case of persistent eve-teasing and harassment, thus further developing the interpretation of abetment in the context of suicide.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the accused for abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court found that the accused’s persistent eve-teasing and harassment created a situation where the victim was left with no option but to end her life. This judgment reinforces the legal consequences of psychological harassment and the importance of protecting women’s rights and dignity.