This proved, the prosecution argued, Sharma resorted to the extreme step of taking her own life due to continuous torture and harassment by the two persons she mentioned in the suicide note.
Countering this, the defence told the court that from the point of evidence, both oral and documentary, no charge of abetment had been proved against Gopal Kanda and Aruna Chadha, the people named by Sharma in her note.
The prosecution submitted before the court that although the deceased was being continuously harassed by the accused, namely Kanda and Chadha since 2006, the immediate cause for her taking the extreme step of committing suicide was the phone call made by two accused persons on August 3 and 4, 2012, to Sharma’s mother in which both not only asked her to sign some papers but also questioned the character of her daughter.
After hearing such allegations about her daughter, the mother spoke to Sharma about these. The additional public prosecutor’s case was that on hearing her mother talking about her character, Sharma became depressed and ultimately committed suicide on the intervening night of August 4-5, 2012.
The defence, responding to the prosecution’s submissions, said that the possibility of Sharma meeting someone in Mumbai and becoming intimate with him on the night of August 3, 2012, could not be ruled out nor of that same person calling her on the night of August 4 and telling her something that eventually led her to commit suicide.
The additional public prosecutor further submitted that the suicide note in this case showed that it was due to the continued harassment by the two accused that Sharma took her own life. In the purported suicide note, she had held both the accused persons responsible for her death and wanted them to be punished accordingly.
The defence questioned the authenticity of the suicide note, pointing out that that had not been proved that the handwriting on the note was that of Sharma or that it was recovered in the manner as deposed by investigation officer Inspector Dinesh Kumar.
The defence also argued that Sharma had not made any “clear and explicit” reference to a specific act or instigation by either Kanda or Chadha, such as forcing her to sign papers agreeing to work in Goa or coercing her to sign on as president of Sundale Educational Society or asking her to refund the fees of Rs 7.5 lakh paid by Kanda for her MBA course.
“Therefore, between 2006-2007 and 2010, when Sharma was in MDLR Company/ hotel, there is no question of harassment or instigation by accused Kanda on record and the alleged acts of a job promotion, the promise not to send her to Goa again and pay parity with Kingfisher Airlines were not unusual. Even otherwise, the said acts can by no means amount to harassment or instigation, done with the intention of causing the deceased to commit suicide,” the defence told the court.