Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010003862025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./69/2025 JOGESH BARUAH AND 2 ORS SON OF - LT. SARBESWAR BARUAH, RESIDENT OF VILL - AMULAPATTY, MAHGHULI CHAPARI, P.O. AND P.S. - DHAKUAKHANA, DISTRICT - LAKHIMPUR, (ASSAM) PIN - 787055, 2: PRIYA RAM PHUKAN SON OF - LT. SUKHESWAR PHUKAN RESIDENT OF VILL - GHATAPARA P.S. - DHAKUAKHANA DISTRICT - LAKHIMPUR (ASSAM) PIN - 787053 3: NAVA KUMAR KONWAR SON OF - LT. KULA NATH KONWAR RESIDENT OF VILL - JAMUGURI P.O. - DIGHALA HILOIDARY P.S. - DHAKUAKHANA DISTRICT - LAKHIMPUR (ASSAM) PIN - 78705 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G CHAMUAH, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER 09.01.2025 Heard Mr. G. Chamuah, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for regular bail to the petitioners who were arrested in connection with Dhakuakhana P.S. Case No.114/2024 under Sections 108/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. Late Banamali Sut was working as the Principal of Sankardev Sishu Niketan, Dhakuakhana. Some people alleged that he was having illicit relationship with a lady teacher of the said school and also indulged in corrupt practices regarding financial expenditures of the school. For that matter, late Banamali Sut was on leave just to avoid an embarrassment in the school. Finally, Banamali Sut committed suicide. His wife has lodged an FIR before police stating that her husband was a man of good reputation and many people raised false allegations against him causing mental disturbance to him and that is the reason why he committed suicide. 4. Police registered a case as Dhakuakhana P.S. 114/2024 and arrested the present three petitioners. 5. Mr. Chamuah has submitted that the alleged acts committed by the petitioners never amounted to abetment of suicide. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. 7. Now, a close look into the law laid down in section 306 IPC may be required. The section 306 of the IPC reads as under: 306. Abetment of suicide Page No.# 3/6 If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. 8. From a bare reading of the provision, it is clear that to constitute an offence under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution has to establish: (i) that a person committed suicide, (ii) that such suicide was abetted by the accused. 9. In other words, an offence under Section 306 would stand only if there is an abetment for the commission of the crime. The parameters of abetment have been stated in Section 107 of the IPC, which defines abetment of a thing as follows: A Section:107. Abetment of a thing person abets the doing of a thing, who - First- Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly- Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly- Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. Explanation 1- A person who by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. 10. As per the law laid down in Section 107, a person can be said to have abetted in doing a thing, if he, firstly, instigates any person to do that thing; or secondly, engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and Page No.# 4/6 in order to the doing of that thing; or thirdly, intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. Explanation to Section 107 states that any willful misrepresentation or willful concealment of material fact which he is bound to disclose, may also come within the contours of abetment. It is manifest that under all the three situations, direct involvement of the person or persons concerned in the commission of offence of suicide is essential to bring home the offence under Section 306 of the IPC. 11. Now, I need to delve into the settled position of law on the subject “abetment to commit suicide”. In Chitresh Kumar Chopra Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), reported in AIR 2010 SC 1446, the Hon,ble Supreme Court has dealt with this subject. The case history of Chitresh Kumar Chopra (supra) goes like this ---- On 4th July, 2002, one Rahul Kaushik lodged the said First Information Report (FIR) with Police Station, Mehrauli stating that his father Jitendra Sharma (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") had committed suicide on 3rd July, 2002 by shooting himself with his licensed revolver. It was alleged that the deceased was a partner with the appellant in this appeal along with two other persons viz., Jahuruddin and Mahavir Prasad and they were all engaged in the real estate business; he committed suicide on account of the problems created by these three persons; the deceased left behind a suicide note which mentioned that there were some money transactions between them and thus, these three persons had abetted the deceased to commit suicide. For the sake of ready reference, relevant portion of the suicide note is extracted below: The money of Shri Bansi Dhar and Shri Grewal is with Ram Pashre. The money of Shri Puri and Rajendra has been given to Ramjan, Mehrauli by Jahur and Jahur has become dishonest. The money of B.C. Malik and K.S. Yadav is with Mahesh, who has written the same and given. The rest, the Page No.# 5/6 ex-SDE, Pamer Singh and had taken and did not do Puri's work. My children known nothing about this matter. C.K. Chopra's money has been given by Jahur, Jahur and Chopra are saying things against me and are thereby troubling me. Kartar etc., money was taken by Jahur and Mahavir. They had taken it. The reason for the scandal are Chopra and his friends. They are troubling me and are pressurizing me to write all this. I am stressed and therefore, going away. 12. The Hon,ble Supreme Court has held -- As per the Section, a person can be said to have abetted in doing a thing, if he, firstly, instigates any person to do that thing; or secondly, engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or thirdly, intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. Explanation to Section 107 states that any wilful misrepresentation or wilful concealment of material fact which he is bound to disclose, may also come within the contours of "abetment". It is manifest that under all the three situations, direct involvement of the person or persons concerned in the commission of offence of suicide is essential to bring home the offence under Section 306 of the IPC. 13. Reverting to the case in hand, this Court is of the opinion that the present three petitioners do not deserve to be detained in custody for the allegations brought against them. Their bail application is allowed. 14. The petitioners, namely- (1) Jogesh Baruah, (2) Priya Ram Phukan and (3) Nava Kumar Konwar who were arrested in connection with Dhakuakhana P.S. Case No.114/2024, shall be released on bail of ₹20,000/- with sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhakuakhana, Page No.# 6/6 Lakhimpur, Assam. With the aforesaid direction, the bail application is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant