The Karnataka High Court has ordered a departmental inquiry against the officer-in-charge of the Banaswadi police station for filing a chargesheet under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (abetment to suicide) in a case where the purported victim was still alive.
Court's Observations
Justice M. Nagaprasanna noted that there was no suicide in the case and directed that the action taken against the officer be reported to the court within three months of receiving a copy of the order. The observation came while allowing the petition filed by Nixon, the accused, who is also the husband of the complainant, Priya.
Background of the Case
The couple, residing in RS Palya, had been married for seven years. On October 21, 2025, around 9 pm, a quarrel broke out when Nixon returned home intoxicated and attempted to assault Priya. She then allegedly attempted suicide by jumping from the second floor of their house, sustaining injuries. After treatment, she approached the Banaswadi police and filed a complaint stating that she had attempted suicide. However, the police registered a case of abetment to suicide against the husband, arrested him, and later filed a chargesheet for the same offense. The trial court denied bail to Nixon.
Reconciliation and Petition
In the meantime, the couple reconciled, and Nixon moved the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings. He argued that no suicide had occurred to invoke the offense of abetment against him. He also stated that the couple wished to live together after resolving their differences.
Strong Disapproval by the Court
After reviewing the complaint and other material, Justice Nagaprasanna strongly disapproved of the police action. He stated that the case reflected mechanical prosecution and reckless use of a penal provision that could not be invoked based on the admitted facts. He emphasized that Section 108 applies only when a person dies by suicide, yet the police registered a case and filed a chargesheet under it.
Impact on the Petitioner
The judge noted that the most disturbing aspect was that the petitioner had spent six months in prison despite the charges lacking any legal basis. This, he said, reflected investigative negligence and disregard for personal liberty.
Justice Nagaprasanna remarked that the criminal justice system cannot function on the whims of investigating officers. The case demonstrated a clear non-application of mind, resulting in the incarceration of a citizen for an offense that did not legally exist.
Directions Issued
The court directed a departmental inquiry against the officer and ordered the immediate release of the petitioner from judicial custody.
