NARAYAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which has come up in this writ petition is, whether, if a person commits suicide out of frustration, due to civil disputes, if the accused who have been prosecuting civil litigations, could be said to have abetted the committing of suicide. A brief reference to the dispute raised by the petitioners- accused is necessary to understand the controversy.

(2.) The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and registered as Sessions Case No. 286/2009. The petitioners/accused filed application before the Sessions Judge, Aurangabad for discharge, claiming that no offence of abetment to commit suicide is made out. The Assistant Sessions Judge, by order dated 10.10.2013, rejected the application. Thus, the present writ petition has been filed claiming that, continuation of the proceedings is abuse of process of law.

(3.) I have heard counsel for the petitioners/accused as well as learned A.P.P. extensively. Learned counsel for petitioners/accused referred to the above litigations and copies of the judgments and orders passed, as well as the warrant of committal, sending Rukmnibai to Civil Prison for one month on 20.2.2009. According to learned counsel, petitioners were pursuing civil remedies available to them under the law and as Rukhamanibai continued to violate the permanent injunction order, the Civil Court had sent her to Civil Prison, and while she was in Civil Prison, she was admitted to hospital where she tried to commit suicide and so, according to learned counsel, petitioners should not be treated to have abetted the committal of suicide.