ASHISHPURI
The Additional Sessions Court in Kapurthala has discharged three police personnel in the 2023 Dhillon brothers suicide case, holding that the material on record, even if accepted at face value in favour of the prosecution, did not establish the offence of abetment of suicide.
Additional Sessions Judge Gurmeet Tiwana passed the order, granting relief to then police officials Navdeep Singh and Balwinder Kumar, along with woman constable Jagjit Kaur.
The case relates to FIR No. 52, registered on September 3, 2023, at Talwandi Chaudhrian police station under Sections 306, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The accused had moved applications under Section 250 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking their discharge from the case.
Background of the case
According to the prosecution's case, police action was taken against Manvjit Singh Dhillon on August 16, 2023. Subsequently, his brother, Jashanbir Singh Dhillon, allegedly became mentally distressed and reportedly jumped into the Beas river on August 17.
The prosecution alleged that Jashanbir took the extreme step after being distressed by the police action against his brother.
A body was later recovered from the Beas river. It was identified as that of Jashanbir on the basis of his clothes, shoes, belt and other belongings.
During the investigation, DNA samples were also collected. According to the court record, however, the DNA examination was inconclusive due to the deteriorated condition of the samples. The FSL report attributed the cause of death to asphyxia due to drowning.
After completing the investigation, the police filed its report before the court under Section 173 of the CrPC.
Defence arguments
Senior Advocate Rajiv Puri, appearing for the accused, submitted that there was no direct or indirect evidence to establish that the accused had abetted Jashanbir's suicide.
The defence also argued that Jashanbir had no direct interaction with the accused police officials. The police action against his brother Manvjit Singh under Sections 107/151 CrPC, it was submitted, was part of a lawful procedure.
The defence relied on the DNA report, call detail records and other circumstances emerging from the investigation.
The prosecution opposed the discharge applications, arguing that sufficient prima facie material existed on record to frame charges and that, at this stage, the court was not required to conduct a detailed assessment of the ultimate evidentiary value of the material.
Court's reasoning
The court observed that merely because a person commits suicide following a particular action, it does not automatically establish the offence of abetment of suicide.
For such an offence to be made out, the court noted, there must be evidence of the accused's intention and a positive act or conduct that can be linked to instigating or intentionally aiding the deceased to take his own life.
The court found that Jashanbir Singh had no direct contact with the accused. He had reportedly gone to the police station and became distressed after witnessing the action taken against his brother. However, the prosecution material did not establish a clear link between any specific act of the accused and Jashanbir's decision to commit suicide.
The court further observed that even if the police action against Manvjit Singh was considered improper, legal remedies, including approaching higher authorities, were available against such action. Criminal liability for abetment of suicide could not be imposed merely because a person became deeply distressed over action taken against a relative and subsequently died by suicide.
Three accused discharged
The Additional Sessions Judge concluded that, even if the allegations on record were accepted in their entirety, the ingredients of the offence of abetment of suicide were not made out.
The court held that there were insufficient grounds to proceed against the accused and allowed the discharge applications filed by Navdeep Singh, Balwinder Kumar and Jagjit Kaur.
With the order, all three police personnel have been discharged from the case.
The court also directed that the case file be consigned to the judicial record room in Kapurthala.
