In a recent case, Laxmi Das vs. The State of West Bengal and Others, the Supreme Court acquitted a mother of charges related to abetting the suicide of a girl who wanted to marry her son. The words “Go and die” were spoken in frustration and anger, but this did not equate to abetment of the deceased’s suicide. In fact, the deceased’s parents themselves opposed the marriage.
The Court ruled that in order to sustain a charge of abetment, there must be some positive act of aiding the suicide, along with mens rea (criminal intent). This is a standard that is often overlooked in such cases. Similarly, an employer should not be held liable for abetment in the suicide of a fired employee or one who was not promoted.
The suicide of the weak-hearted should not be blamed on individuals who, knowingly or unknowingly, may have caused emotional distress, unless they had criminal intent to hasten her death or were otherwise complicit.
Case 2: Disproportionate assets cannot be concluded when tax returns are accurate
In a recent case, Nirankar Nath Pandey vs. State of U.P. & Others, the Supreme Court quashed an FIR filed against an excise assistant commissioner who was accused of amassing wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income, under the Prevention of Corruption Act, which applies to public servants. The period during which the alleged wealth accumulation occurred spanned from 1996 to 2021—over 25 years.
The Apex Court noted that property prices tend to appreciate over such a long period. Additionally, the commissioner’s wife, a yoga teacher, contributed to the family’s finances. The court observed that he had been consistently filing accurate income tax returns, fully disclosing his income and assets. It emphasized that these returns should be presumed to reflect the complete picture of the individual’s financial standing.
Therefore, the Court found it erroneous to presume that he had accumulated disproportionate assets in relation to his known sources of income. The Court also pointed out that a wife, contributing part-time income, plays a legitimate role in building family assets.
Case 4: Standards of probity are set high for bank managers
In a case, the General Manager, Syndicate Bank vs. B S N Prasad, the Supreme Court recently laid down the salutary principle that even if an alleged corrupt bank manager is acquitted in a criminal case for want of watertight evidence, he can be dismissed from services by the bank’s disciplinary committee as standards of probity are set much higher for bank managers entrusted with public funds.
The accused had himself confessed to wrongdoing in disbursal of Kissan Credit Card funds. While a Court dealing with criminal charges may demand watertight case against the accused, a bank cannot on the ground no watertight case exists retain an employee under serious cloud. Fiduciaries like Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion.
Case 2: Community service in lieu of FIR for not wearing helmet
In the case of Hushad Neville Bacha vs. Eric Girgol Vegas, the Bombay High Court recently spared a 22-year-old from the ignominy of court proceedings that could tarnish his character and potentially hinder his employment opportunities. Instead of pursuing legal action, the Court ordered him to perform community service at a local hospital for four Sundays as a consequence for driving without a helmet.
It’s a fine judgement indeed. Here was a youngster whose life is yet to unfold. He had not committed a heinous crime but only endangered his own life. Time spent at hospital would sufficiently shame him and make him behave better on roads in future.
A similar plea for community service was made by Rajat Gupta of McKensey and Co pedigree while he was sentenced to prison on being convicted for insider trading. The Manhattan Court rightly dismissed his request by saying courts cannot mete out Mother Teresa justice. To be sure juveniles are reformed but not the matured ones who knew pretty well that what they did was to line their own pockets.
