Nipun Aneja and Others Vs State of Uttar Pradesh (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court held that merely on the allegation of harassment without their being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable.
Facts- The deceased, namely, Rajeev Jain was an employee of Hindustan Lever Limited. He was serving with the company past twenty-three years. On 03.11.2006, he committed suicide in his hotel room in Lucknow. The brother of the deceased, namely, Rajnish Jain lodged a First Information Report on 4 November 2006 in connection with the suicide committed by his brother.
Thus, it appears on plain reading of the First Information Report that the appellants before us in their capacity as senior officers of the company had convened a meeting on 3 November 2006 with the employees of the company at Hotel Amber in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. The deceased alongwith his colleagues was present in the meeting. The gravamen of the charge is that the company wanted around fifty to sixty office employees to opt for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS). As all those employees were not ready to opt for the VRS scheme, they were being harassed in some manner or the other. It is further alleged that in the course of the meeting the deceased was humiliated by the appellants & he felt very bad about it.
