DR. PRIYANK TAPURIA V. STATE OF ORISSA & ANR., 2024 (ORI) 50
FACTS: The petitioner and the deceased were in the process of arranging their marriage since 2019, with the petitioner pursuing medical education at AIIMS, Bhubaneswar. Due to his studies, he proposed postponing the marriage by two years, which the deceased's family disagreed with. Consequently, in November 2020, the deceased's family arranged her engagement with a boy from Nagpur, but the marriage plans were later called off in February 2021. Talks resumed in May 2021 between the petitioner's and deceased's families, leading to an engagement ceremony on May 30, 2021. Despite attempts to reconcile, tensions persisted, exacerbated when the petitioner, pressured by both families, agreed to a marriage date conflicting with his fellowship selection exam scheduled for November 16, 2021. On November 12, 2021, during a group video call, the petitioner allegedly expressed reluctance towards the marriage, which was further conveyed by his father later that evening. Subsequently, in a late-night phone call, the deceased and the petitioner discussed their relationship, culminating in the petitioner harshly calling off the marriage around 4:00 A.M. The following morning, the deceased tragically took her own life, leading to the filing of an FIR against the petitioner under Section 306 IPC.
ISSUES: Whether rejecting marriage after engagement constitutes abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC? Could the deceased have been prevented had circumstances been different or if the petitioner intentionally influenced her decision?
OBSERVATION: The Orissa High Court clarified that merely declining to marry someone after engagement does not per se constitute 'abetment of suicide' under Section 306 IPC. The court emphasized that reluctance to commit to marriage and assume lifelong responsibilities does not imply criminal intent. It was noted that the petitioner should have clearly communicated his stance regarding the marriage from the outset. However, the court dismissed the notion that such conduct amounted to 'abetment of suicide'. Consequently, the court quashed the order taking cognizance against the petitioner and dismissed the criminal proceedings.
