FIR registration - The Legal Chamber

Mens Rea is Must: Supreme Court Rules Accused Must Intend to Drive Victim to Suicide for Abetment Charge

19Sep

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Mens Rea is Must: Supreme Court Rules Accused Must Intend to Drive Victim to Suicide for Abetment Charge

The Supreme Court reiterated that to establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of mens rea and a proximate act of instigation by the accused, which directly led the deceased to commit suicide. Mere allegations of harassment, without positive action intended to push the victim toward suicide, are insufficient to sustain the charge. The absence of a live link between the alleged acts and the suicide warranted quashing of the FIR. Facts Of The Case: A seven-term independent Member of Parliament committed suicide on 22 February 2021, leaving behind a suicide note. In the note, he named several officials from the administration and police of Dadra and Nagar Haveli, accusing them of conspiring to defame, degrade, and demean him to end his political caree...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Loan Case, Says Mere Default Doesn’t Make It a Crime

The Supreme Court held that a loan transaction creates a debtor-creditor relationship, and a mere breach of its terms does not automatically constitute criminal breach of trust under Section 405 IPC without evidence of dishonest intention. The Court clarified that such disputes, arising from commercial transactions, are primarily civil in nature and a preliminary inquiry is permissible before registering an FIR. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, a director of M/s Benlon India Ltd., availed three loans from the first respondent, Hero Fincorp, for purchasing machinery. While the first two loans were used for the intended purpose, a fire destroyed the plant shortly after the disbursement of the third loan. Consequently, this third loan was converted into an unsecured corporate loan. Benlon ...

Supreme Court Exposes Cover-Up, Mandates CBI Investigation for Custodial Violence

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in not mandating the registration of anCfor custodial torture, as per Lalita Kumari v. State of U.P., which mandates immediate FIR registration for cognizable offences. The Court directed a CBI investigation to ensure impartiality, citing institutional bias and conflict of interest. It quashed the counter FIR under Section 309 IPC as mala fide and awarded ₹50 lakhs compensation for the egregious violation of Article 21. The judgment reaffirmed the constitutional duty to protect citizens from state excesses and uphold human dignity. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Khursheed Ahmad Chohan, a police constable in Jammu & Kashmir, was summoned for an inquiry related to a narcotics case on February 17, 2023. He reported to the Joint Interro...