Rajasthan HC rejects Bail to REET Paper Leak Accused Ram Kripal Meena
Allahabad HC Reserves Verdict on Muslim Parties' Plea Against Varanasi Court Order
Jharkhand HC Announces 55 Assistant Positions in Ranchi; Online Applications Now Open!
Sister-in-Law's Frequent Visits Insufficient to Establish Residence in DV Case : Bombay HC
P&H HC Grants Interim Bail to Eight-Month Pregnant Woman Accused in Murder Case, Citing Health Risks to Mother and Unborn Child
Kerala HC Denies 'Non-Creamy Layer' Certification Plea, Citing Ineligibility Based on Hereditary Occupation Criteria
ED Shifts Sameer Wankhede's Money Laundering Case to Delhi, Informs Bombay HC
J& H HC Emphasizes Due Process, Slams Overuse of Preventive Detention under PSA
Madras High Court Quashes FIR Against Journalist Abhijit Majumder Over Periyar Remarks
Calcutta HC Takes Suo Motu Action on Alleged Sexual Assault and Land Transfer in Sandeshkhali
 Love Failure Doesn't Constitute Abetment to Suicide : Delhi HC

Love Failure Doesn't Constitute Abetment to Suicide : Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has observed that where a lover commits suicide due to love failure, the woman involved cannot be deemed responsible for encouraging or contributing to the act of suicide.

Justice Amit Mahajan has affirmed that in instances where a man, due to his vulnerable mental state, makes a misguided decision leading to suicide, it is unjust to hold another individual accountable for abetting his actions.

“If a lover commits suicide due to love failure, if a student commits suicide because of his poor performance in the examination, if a client commits suicide because his case is dismissed, the lady, examiner, lawyer respectively cannot be held to have abetted the commission of suicide,” the court said.

The statement emphasized, "In cases where a man, particularly one with a fragile or vulnerable mental state, makes an erroneous decision leading to suicide, it is inappropriate to attribute blame to another person for abetting his actions."

Justice Mahajan rendered these remarks while granting anticipatory bail to a woman and a man implicated in a case of abetment of suicide. The First Information Report (FIR) was filed based on a complaint lodged by the father of the deceased individual. The woman applicant was romantically involved with the deceased, while the other applicant was a mutual friend.

The allegations suggested that the applicants allegedly provoked the deceased by claiming they were engaged in physical relations and planning to marry soon. The deceased's mother discovered his body with the door of his room partially open. Additionally, a suicide note was recovered, wherein the deceased purportedly stated that he was taking his own life because of the two applicants.

In granting anticipatory bail to the applicants, the court noted that prima facie evidence from the WhatsApp conversations presented suggested that the deceased had a sensitive disposition and would frequently threaten the woman in question with suicide whenever she declined to engage with him.

“It is correct that the deceased had written the name of the applicants in suicide note, but, in the opinion of this Court, there is nothing mentioned, as to the nature of threats in the alleged suicide note written by deceased of such an alarming proportion so as to drive a 'normal person' to contemplate suicide,” the court said.

The court further emphasized that the matter concerning the purported suicide note and any potential instigation by the applicants would be examined during the trial proceedings.

The court observed that at first glance, the alleged suicide note primarily reflected the deceased's distress towards the applicants. However, it couldn't be conclusively inferred from this that the applicants harbored any intention that directly contributed to the deceased's decision to take his own life.

Counsel for Applicants: Sr. Adv. Maninder Singh with Adv. Arjun Sanjay, Adv. Aekta Vats & Adv. Simran Chaudhary; Mr. Vineet Jain, Adv

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for the State; Adv. Urvashi Sharma, for complainant

Title: AARUSHI GUPTA v. STATE GNCT OF DELHI and other connected matter

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy