Summary
Repeated, targeted humiliation of a young woman, culminating in a final incident immediately before her suicide, established intentional instigation rather than isolated teasing on the proved facts. The adult appellants’ abetment convictions and reduced sentences were upheld. A separate appellant’s undisputed school certificate established that he was about sixteen at the relevant time; his conviction was set aside and proceedings terminated on juvenility grounds.
Issues
- When sustained harassment and humiliating utterances amount to abetment of suicide.
- Whether the juvenility plea could be accepted for the first time in this appeal.
Provisions considered
- Sections 107 and 306, Indian Penal Code, 1860Required intentional instigation or assistance and a sufficiently proximate connection to suicide; the sustained course of targeted conduct met that test here. (¶¶ 13–16.2, 18–24)
Held
- Mere allegations of harassment, ordinary discord or a passing angry remark do not suffice. Incitement, mens rea and proximity must be established from the whole factual setting, including the conduct and circumstances of both accused and deceased. (¶ 14–16.2)
- The accused acted together in a continuing campaign designed to destroy the victim’s self-esteem, targeting her after her broken engagement and amid disputes with her parents. The credible evidence of the final taunts, night-long distress and suicide the following morning established deliberate goading and proximity. (¶ 18–24)
- The offence was not confined to insulting modesty: the repeated intimidation and humiliation amounted to instigation on these facts. The adult appellants’ convictions and sentences did not warrant interference. (¶ 22–25)
- Juvenility may be raised even at the appellate stage. The unchallenged matriculation certificate established appellant 2’s date of birth and age below eighteen at the incident; no further enquiry was necessary on this record. (¶ 10–11.2)
Result
Appeal partly allowed for appellant 2: conviction set aside and proceedings terminated on juvenility grounds. Appeal dismissed for appellants 1 and 3, who must serve the remaining part of the High Court’s two-and-a-half-year sentence.