Important decision by Supreme Court related about workplace, depression and suicide
Wednesday - June 27, 2018 2:13 pm ,
Category : WTN SPECIAL
“Load of work to an employee does mean to harass or force him to commit suicide”
JUNE 27 (WTN) - In a significant decision, the Supreme Court has said that senior officials can’t be held responsible if any employee committed suicide in depression due to excess workload in the office. The Supreme Court said that when a senior officer submits the load of work to an employee, it can’t be seen with intent to harass the employee or force him to commit suicide.
The Supreme Court dismissed logic of the Bombay High Court's Aurangabad bench, stating that the officer can be convicted in such a situation when there are situations where unbearable psychological stress arises. Even the officer is not directly motivating the employee.
According to the information, Kishore Parashar, who worked in the Aurangabad office of deputy director of education in Maharashtra government, committed suicide in August 2017. The wife of Kishore Parashar lodged a complaint against the senior officer in police for instigating her husband for suicide. The wife of the deceased had alleged that her senior employed her husband for excessive work, which required working till late evening.
At the same time, the deceased's wife had alleged that senior used to call her husband anytime and also to work in vacations. His one month salary was halted and there were threatened to stop the increase in salary. The deceased's wife claimed that her husband was ‘quiet’ at home and senior was responsible for her suicide.
In this case, after registering an FIR by Aurangabad police, senior officials went to Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court to cancel the FIR. On January 23, the High Court rejected the petition to cancel the FIR. The court said, "The facts indicate that the deceased has not been proven directly and they had no intention of making the deceased suicidal. But despite not having any intention, there is a situation of creating mental stress that if a person commits suicide, then it can be said that the accused is being motivated to commit suicide."
When the senior officer appealed before the Supreme Court, the standing committee of Maharashtra government Nishant Kantewakkar opposed the petition. A bench of Arun Mishra and U.U. Lalit rejected the argument of the High Court. Justice Lalit, who wrote this decision, said, "It is true that if a person is intentionally instigated to commit suicide, then the action under section 306 (incitement to suicide) of the IPC will be taken. However, in this case the record facts are inadequate to reach that conclusion.” The Bench canceled the FIR against the senior official.
JUNE 27 (WTN) - In a significant decision, the Supreme Court has said that senior officials can’t be held responsible if any employee committed suicide in depression due to excess workload in the office. The Supreme Court said that when a senior officer submits the load of work to an employee, it can’t be seen with intent to harass the employee or force him to commit suicide.
The Supreme Court dismissed logic of the Bombay High Court's Aurangabad bench, stating that the officer can be convicted in such a situation when there are situations where unbearable psychological stress arises. Even the officer is not directly motivating the employee.
According to the information, Kishore Parashar, who worked in the Aurangabad office of deputy director of education in Maharashtra government, committed suicide in August 2017. The wife of Kishore Parashar lodged a complaint against the senior officer in police for instigating her husband for suicide. The wife of the deceased had alleged that her senior employed her husband for excessive work, which required working till late evening.
At the same time, the deceased's wife had alleged that senior used to call her husband anytime and also to work in vacations. His one month salary was halted and there were threatened to stop the increase in salary. The deceased's wife claimed that her husband was ‘quiet’ at home and senior was responsible for her suicide.
In this case, after registering an FIR by Aurangabad police, senior officials went to Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court to cancel the FIR. On January 23, the High Court rejected the petition to cancel the FIR. The court said, "The facts indicate that the deceased has not been proven directly and they had no intention of making the deceased suicidal. But despite not having any intention, there is a situation of creating mental stress that if a person commits suicide, then it can be said that the accused is being motivated to commit suicide."
When the senior officer appealed before the Supreme Court, the standing committee of Maharashtra government Nishant Kantewakkar opposed the petition. A bench of Arun Mishra and U.U. Lalit rejected the argument of the High Court. Justice Lalit, who wrote this decision, said, "It is true that if a person is intentionally instigated to commit suicide, then the action under section 306 (incitement to suicide) of the IPC will be taken. However, in this case the record facts are inadequate to reach that conclusion.” The Bench canceled the FIR against the senior official.
