The High Court of Delhi recently cancel the summons issued against Dr. GK Arora, a former principal of Delhi University’s B R Ambedkar College in a case of instigating a faculty member’s suicide in 2013. It is said that suicide was done solely due to strict or harsh decisions made in the course of duty.
The case was judged by the Justice Amit Sharma, he said that because no proper evidence was met with the required standards to prove abetment, the court is dismissing the abetment charges against the former principal.
The case originated following the suicide of a faculty member at Delhi University. She left a suicide note in which she gave the reason of her actions because of her harassment done by Dr. GK Arora, Ravinder Singh, and other officials as well including then-Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit and the Delhi University Vice-Chancellor. She alleged that due to extensive mental and physical stress and arbitrary termination from her job in 2012 was the reason for her drastic step.
Based on these accusations, authorities registered a case under the Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which addresses instigation of suicide. At that time, authorities issued the summons for the principal following all these allegations.
According to the court’s judgement, a person may make the decisions that causes distress to the other person, but unless there is no evidence to prove the distress led the other person to take their own life, such actions do not proof the first person as guilty.
The High Court also emphasized that to establish the abetment under Section 306, the accused must have shown clear intent to instigate or encourage the act of suicide. But in this case, the court noted that there is as such no connection found between the principal and the faculty member’s tragic decision of suicide, like there was a significant gap over a year between her termination and demise, hence the High Court of Delhi has ruled that the principal cannot be held responsible for her suicide. With all these findings the court quashed the summons, effectively dismissing the abetment charges against the former principal.
This case underscores the high legal threshold for the abetment charges in suicide cases, where intent and direct linkage to the act must be established. This ruling sets the importance of balancing accusations with the strict evidentiary standards, especially in the sensitive cases involving mental health and workplace issues.
