SANJU @ SANJA Y SINGH SENGAR versus STATE OF M.P.

Citation: [2002] 3 S.C.R. 668 · Decided: 01-05-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.B. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 5 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
SANJU @ SANJA Y SINGH SENGAR . 
v. 
STATE OF M.P. 
MAY I, 2002 
[M.B. SHAH AND H.K. SEMA, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860-Sections 306 and 107-Abetment of suicide-On 
facts, strained relation between parties-Quarrel between the parties where 
C appellant allegedly using abusive language and telling the deceased to go and 
die-Deceased coming home in an inebriated condition day after quarrel and 
next day found hanging-Also left a suicide note a reading of which shows 
deceased not a man with sound mind and sense-Appellant charge-sheeted-
Whether appellant abetted commission of such suicide-Held, no since suicide 
not direct result of quarrel-Further to say 'to go and die', itself does not 
D constitute ingredient of instigation. 
E 
Words and Phrases: 
'lnstigation'-Meaning of in the context of Section 107 of the Penal 
Code, 1860. 
Appellant was charge-s.heeted for an offence under Section 306 IPC. 
-· 
According to the prosecution suicide by the deceased is the direct result of 
the quarrel taken place two days prior to the incident wherein it is alleged 
that the appellant had used abusive language and reportedly told the 
deceased to go and die. Aggrieved, appellant filed a petition before the High 
F Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing charges. The petition was 
..__ 
dismissed. Hence the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
G 
HELD : 1.1. Courts below erroneously accepted the prosecution story 
that suicide by the deceased is the direct result of the quarrel wherein it is 
alleged that the appellant had used abusive language and_ had reportedly 
told the deceased 'to go and die'. The courts relied on a statement of brother 
of the deceased, However, going through the statement it is not found that 
the deceased had told him that the appellant had asked him 'to go and die'. 
H 
~8 
... 
• 
SANJU v. STATE OF M.P. 
669 
Even if the prosecution story that the appellant did tell the deceased 'to go A . 
and die' is accepted, that itself does not constitute the ingredient of 
'instigation'. [672-F-H; 673-A[ 
1.2. The word 'instigate' denotes incitement or urging to do some 
drastic or unadvisable action or to stimulate or incite. Presence of mens 
rea is the necessary concomitant of instigation. It is common knowledge B 
that the words uttered in a quarrel or in a spur of the moment cannot be 
taken to be uttered with mens rea. It is in a fit of anger and emotion. In 
.., y 
the instant case, the alleged abusive words, said to have been told to the 
deceased were ensued by quarrel and two days later deceased was found 
hanging. Assuming that the deceased had taken the abusive language C 
seriously, he had enough time in between to think over and reflect and, 
therefore, it cannot be said that the abusive language, which had been used 
by the appellant drove the deceased to commit suicide. Suicide by the 
deceased is not proximate to the abusive language uttered by the appellant. 
[673-A-C[ D 
1.3. A plain reading of the suicide note would clearly show that the 
deceased was in great stress and depressed. One plausible reason could be 
that the deceased was without any work or avocation and at the same time 
indulged in drinking as revealed from the statement of his wife. He was a 
frustrated man. Also a day before hanging himself, deceased came home E 
in an inebriated condition and was abusing his wife and other members of 
the family. Reading of the suicide note suggest that it is not a handy work 
of a man with sound mind and sense. The prosecution story, if believe, 
shows that the quarrel between the deceased and the appellant had taken 
place two days before the deceased hanged himself and if the deceased came 
back to the house again a day before the incident it cannot be said that the F 
suicide by the deceased was the direct result of the quarrel that had taken 
place. Thus, the ingredients of 'abetment' are totally absent for an offence 
under Section 306 I.P.C. It is in the statement of the wife that the deceased 
always remained in a drunken condition. It is a common knowledge that 
•v•essive drinking leads one to debauchery. Therefore, the deceased was a G 
victim of his own conduct, unconnected with the quarrel that had ensued 
and was himself responsible for his death. [674-F-H; 675-A-C[ 
Swamy Praha/addas v. State of MP. and Anr., [1995] Supp. 3 SCC 438; 
Mahendra Singh v. State of MP., [1995[ Supp. 3 SCC 731 and Ramesh Kumar 
v. State ofChhattisgarh, [2001 [ 9 sec 618, referred to. 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.