Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 28 (0.24 seconds)Section 306 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 306 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 107 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Amalendu Pal @ Jhantu vs State Of West Bengal on 11 November, 2009
20. In the background of this legal position, we may advert to
the case at hand. The question as to what is the cause of a
suicide has no easy answers because suicidal ideation and
behaviours in human beings are complex and multifaceted.
Different individuals in the same situation react and behave
differently because of the personal meaning they add to each
event, thus accounting for individual vulnerability to suicide.
Each individual's suicidability pattern depends on his inner
subjective experience of mental pain, fear and loss of self-
respect. Each of these factors are crucial and exacerbating
contributor to an individual's vulnerability to end his own
life, which may either be an attempt for self-protection or an
escapism from intolerable self.”
10
(2009) 16 SCC 605
20
This has been reiterated in the decision in Amalendu Pal @ Jhantu v. State of
West Bengal11, where it has been observed:
Vaijnath Kondiba Khandke vs The State Of Maharashtra on 17 May, 2018
“12. […] It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged
abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect
acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the
allegation of harassment without there being any positive
action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the
accused which led or compelled the person to commit
suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not
sustainable.”
(See also in this context the judgments in Praveen Pradhan v. State of
Uttaranchal12, Vaijnath Kondiba Khandke v. State of Maharashtra 13, M. Arjunan
v. The State (Represented By Its Inspector of Police)14, Ude Singh v. State of
Haryana 15, Rajesh @ Sarkari v. The State of Haryana 16 and Gurcharan Singh v.
The State of Punjab 17.
Kasinathan, Velayutham And Arjunan vs State, Represented By Inspector Of ... on 19 September, 2005
“12. […] It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged
abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect
acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the
allegation of harassment without there being any positive
action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the
accused which led or compelled the person to commit
suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not
sustainable.”
(See also in this context the judgments in Praveen Pradhan v. State of
Uttaranchal12, Vaijnath Kondiba Khandke v. State of Maharashtra 13, M. Arjunan
v. The State (Represented By Its Inspector of Police)14, Ude Singh v. State of
Haryana 15, Rajesh @ Sarkari v. The State of Haryana 16 and Gurcharan Singh v.
The State of Punjab 17.
Ude Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 25 July, 2019
“12. […] It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged
abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect
acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the
allegation of harassment without there being any positive
action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the
accused which led or compelled the person to commit
suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not
sustainable.”
(See also in this context the judgments in Praveen Pradhan v. State of
Uttaranchal12, Vaijnath Kondiba Khandke v. State of Maharashtra 13, M. Arjunan
v. The State (Represented By Its Inspector of Police)14, Ude Singh v. State of
Haryana 15, Rajesh @ Sarkari v. The State of Haryana 16 and Gurcharan Singh v.
The State of Punjab 17.
Rajesh @ Sarkari vs The State Of Haryana on 3 November, 2020
“12. […] It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged
abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect
acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the
allegation of harassment without there being any positive
action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the
accused which led or compelled the person to commit
suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not
sustainable.”
(See also in this context the judgments in Praveen Pradhan v. State of
Uttaranchal12, Vaijnath Kondiba Khandke v. State of Maharashtra 13, M. Arjunan
v. The State (Represented By Its Inspector of Police)14, Ude Singh v. State of
Haryana 15, Rajesh @ Sarkari v. The State of Haryana 16 and Gurcharan Singh v.
The State of Punjab 17.