BENGALURU: If capturing nude pictures of the deceased woman and blackmailing her is proved, it can undoubtedly become abetment to suicide, the Karnataka High Court said, refusing to quash criminal proceedings against a 28-year-old man from Mandya for abetting the suicide of a woman, with whom he was in a live-in relationship. He had used her nude pictures to extort over Rs 50 lakh.
Justice M Nagaprasanna made these observations while rejecting the petition filed by Varun GA, challenging the chargesheet and proceedings pending before the Anekal trial court, under the provisions of 306 IPC and Sections 66(E) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act.
According to the complaint registered by the victim’s father with Hebbagodi police station, his daughter and the accused were classmates in an engineering college in Mandya. His daughter began working with a firm in Bengaluru, and she and Varun were in a relationship for three years. There were assurances of marriage and also financial transactions between them. On December 28, 2023, the woman ended her life by jumping from the sixth floor of her apartment.
A senior counsel representing the petitioner argued that there is a plethora of judgments by the apex court that utterance of the words “go and die” would not become abetment to suicide.
Drawing the attention of the court to the chargesheet, statements and FSL report of pictures found in the mobiles of the petitioner and victim, Additional State Public Prosecutor BN Jagadeesha contended that if it is a simple case of uttering ‘go and die’, there would be no case for the prosecution.
The last fight between the petitioner and woman had led to her suicide. The pictures the petitioner had captured on his phone are horrendous and holding those, he had threatened and extorted almost Rs 51 lakh through credit card for his business, he argued.
The court said the petitioner’s laptop and mobile phone are full of pictures and videos of the deceased and petitioner, taken during their live-in relationship. The plea that it’s a case of mere scorned affection or a casual taunt cannot be countenanced when placed against the backdrop of deliberate humiliation and alleged extortion.