High Court can’t Determine the Issue of Intention of Accused when Investigation was not Completed- Supreme Court


November 30, 2018

Case name: Narayan Malhari Thorat v. Vinayak Deorao Bhagat and Anr.

The present appeal was against Bombay High Court’s judgment, whereby the Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the Respondent. In the case, the Respondent was accused of offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of IPC.


The Appellant assailed the order on the ground that the High Court was not justified in entering into questions whether the record prima facie established that the respondent had requisite intention in order to bring the matter within the confines of Section 306 IPC and in quashing the FIR in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC.

Bench’s Verdict

The Two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court allowed the Appeal in the case and made the following observations:

The Apex Court in the case noted that there were definite allegations that the first respondent would keep on calling the wife of the victim on her mobile and keep harassing her which allegations are supported by the statements of the mother and the wife of the victim recorded during investigation. The record also showed that few days prior to the suicide there was an altercation between the victim and the first respondent. In the light of these facts, coupled with the fact that the suicide note made definite allegation against first respondent, the High Court was not justified in entering into question whether the first respondent had the requisite intention to aid or instigate or abate the commission of suicide.

The Supreme Court in the case made an essential observation by noting that when the investigation was yet to be completed and charge-sheet, if any, was yet to be filed, the High Court ought not to have gone into the aspect whether there was requisite mental element or intention on part of the respondent.

The entire case can be accessed here.