New Delhi, October 6
Any boss who persistently harasses an employee and insults him by saying that anyone else in his place would have committed suicide will attract the charge of abetment to suicide, the Supreme Court has ruled.

A Bench comprising Justices BS Chauhan and FMA Kalifulla, however, clarified that “no strait-jacket formula can be laid down to find out as to whether in a particular case there has been instigation which forced the person to commit suicide.”

The SC gave the ruling while dismissing an appeal of a supervisor-level employee of a company in Haridwar seeking quashing of the FIR registered against him on the charge of driving a junior to commit suicide.

The Bench noted that in the case, the alleged harassment was not casual. Rather it “remained a matter of persistent harassment.” The victim was a qualified graduate engineer and still suffered persistent harassment and humiliation.

Further, the victim had to “endure continuous illegal demands” of his boss and upon non-fulfilment of these, he was “mercilessly harassed.” He was forced to work continuously for 16-17 hours at a stretch, the Bench pointed out.

“Such harassment, coupled with the utterance of words to the effect that ‘had there been any other person in his place, he would have certainly committed sucide’ is what makes the present case distinct,” from others, the Bench held.

The Supreme Court said that in some cases, there may not be direct evidence of instigation which had a direct connection with the suicide.

“Therefore, in such cases, an inference has to be drawn from the circumstances and it is to be determined whether the circumstances had been such which in fact had created the situation that a person felt totally frustrated and committed suicide.”

More so, while dealing with an application for quashing of the proceedings, the judiciary “cannot form a firm opinion,” the Supreme Court clarified in the verdict delivered on October 4.