logo
Breaking News
Tip Off

Providing Medical Assistance to Wife Wouldn't Absolve Abetment to Suicide Charge Against Husband: Allahabad HC [READ ORDER]

Providing Medical Assistance
In a recent case of Sameer Ali Khan v. State of U.P, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the bail plea of a Husband who was booked for abetting his wife's suicide while noting that only providing medical assistance to his wife would not go to absolve the applicant from the allegations.

Where the accused had, by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct, created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide, in which case, an instigation’ may have to be inferred,” the court said.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi further stated that the husband did not even permit his wife to see her  son, which caused acute nostalgia for her and she was in the stage of severe psychological turmoil.

The learned counsel for the applicant tried to impress upon the Court that it is the husband who has made all efforts to save the life of his wife and provided all necessary medical succour to her, on which the court observed that “Providing Medical Assistance To Wife Wouldn't Absolve From Guilt.”

Facts of the case:

An F.I.R. was lodged by one Adil (brother of the deceased) on 15.1.2020 against the applicant and Rajni Singh Thakur u/s 498A, 304B of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.), 1860 and provisions of the Dowry Protection (D.P) Act, 1961.

As per the text of the F.I.R., the sister of the informant got married about six months back according to Muslim Rites and she was subjected to cruel treatment with regard to additional dowry by her husband and other in-laws. This was her third marriage, while from her first marriage he was having a son.

On 13.01.2020, after hatching conspiracy, the accused persons administered her with some poisonous substance and killed her. After collecting the material, the Police changed the texture of the case and submitted the report u/s 173 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), 1973, only for the offence u/s 306 I.P.C., dropping all sections in which the F.I.R. was initially registered.

Court's observations:

The High Court noted that the witness Shabnam (sister of the deceased) stated that about three days back the deceased has given a call to her, expressing her desire to meet his son but the applicant was physically torturing her and not permitting her to meet her son. She further stated that on 14.01.2020 she received a call from the police that her sister has consumed some poison. It was further stated by Shabnam that she too had requested the applicant to permit her sister to meet her son, which was declined by the applicant point blank. 

When her demand was severely resisted by the applicant, the deceased has consumed some poisonous substance,” it has been observed.

The court observed that the co-accused Rajni Singh has admitted that, the deceased had got married with her son Sameer and on 13.01.2020 and she was insisting to bring back her son who is staying with Islam, her erstwhile husband.

The court said that:

This by itself might have given an emotional jerk and jolt to a mother who cannot even meet or see his son. Assessing or visualizing from the side of f the mother, who is said to be the first and the most sensitive person towards her child, she was not even permitted by her own husband, with whom she has got married barely four months back.” 

It was further opined that the offence of abetment may be committed directly but the same can also be accomplished by creating such circumstances which may amount to abetment.

At last, the judge did not find any good reason to exercise his power u/s 439 Cr.P.C., and accordingly, the bail application stood rejected.

 

[READ ORDER]


260 Views

Leave a Reply

Top
ad image