Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, K.V. VISWANATHAN, JJ.
Mahendra Awase – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 221 Of 2025 (@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 11868 Of 2023)
Decided On : 17-01-2025
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 306 read with Section 107 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Section 108 read with Section 45] – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 227 [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 250] – Abetment of suicide – Rejection of discharge application – In order to bring a case within purview of Section 306 IPC there must be a case of suicide and in commission of said offence, person who is said to have abetted commission of suicide must have played active role by act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate commission of suicide – Act of abetment by person charged with said offence must be proved and established by prosecution before he could be convicted under Section 306 IPC – To satisfy requirement of instigation accused by his act or omission or by a continued course of conduct should have created such circumstances that deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide – There are no grounds to frame charges under Section 306 IPC against appellant – While persons involved in genuine cases where threshold is met should not be spared, provision should not be deployed against individuals, only to assuage immediate feelings of distraught family of deceased – Conduct of proposed accused and deceased, their interactions and conversations preceding unfortunate death of deceased should be approached from a practical point of view and not divorced from day-to-day realities of life – Hyperboles employed in exchanges should not, without anything more, be glorified as an instigation to commit suicide – Appellant discharged from criminal case. (Paras 16, 18, 19, 20 and 21)
Facts of the case:
Present appeal calls in question judgment and order dated 25.07.2023 in Criminal Revision No. 1142 of 2023 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore. By said judgment, High Court declined prayer of appellant to discharge him from the offences punishable under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code and maintained the charges as framed by Trial Court.
Findings of Court:
It is time investigating agencies are sensitised to the law laid down by this Court under Section 306 so that persons are not subjected to the abuse of process of a totally untenable prosecution. The trial courts also should exercise great caution and circumspection and should not adopt a play it safe syndrome by mechanically framing charges, even if the investigating agencies in a given case have shown utter disregard for the ingredients of Section 306 of IPC.
Result : Appeal allowed.
Key Points: - The judgment emphasizes that abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC requires active instigation or an act/omission that leaves the deceased with no option but to commit suicide (!) (!) . - Instigation cannot be inferred from casual or heated exchanges alone; there must be direct or indirect acts that create circumstances compelling the suicide (!) (!) . - The Court discharges the appellant, holding that the material did not satisfy the threshold for framing a charge under Section 306 IPC, and criticizes the habitual filing of such charges without proper evidence (!) (!) (!) . - Instigation as per Section 107 requires instigating, conspiracy, or intentional aiding in the doing of the act; mere harassment or heated conversation is insufficient without clear mens rea and proximate causation (!) (!) (!) (!) . - Previous jurisprudence cited: Swamy Prahaladdas, Madan Mohan Singh, Amalendu Pal, M. Mohan, Ramesh Kumar, establishing the high threshold for Section 306 IPC and need for direct/proximate instigation (!) (!) (!) [p_87? (referenced as p_85/p_86)]. - The court instructs sensitization of investigating agencies and caution by trial courts to avoid untenable prosecutions and "play it safe" framing of charges (!) .
JUDGMENT :
(K.V. Viswanathan, J.)
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal calls in question the judgment and order dated 25.07.2023 in Criminal Revision No. 1142 of 2023 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore. By the said judgment, the High Court declined the prayer of the appellant to discharge him from the offences punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’ for short) and maintained the charges as framed by the Trial Court on 28.02.2023.
Brief Facts:
3. On 31.12.2022 a First Information Report was registered at PS Maingaon on the information of Dharmendra. The informant stated that his brother Bhagwan Singh was residing near his house along with his son Ranjeet Chauhan; that on 11.10.2022 Ranjeet had left home around 10 AM on his Motorcycle to go to the farm; that when he did not return home till around 2 PM, he called him, but he got no response; that his nephews - Shivam Chauhan and Kuldeep Chauhan started searching for Ranjeet and while searching they went towards Rangaon. There they found a Motorcycle parked on the side of the road and when they searched nearby, around 6 PM in the evening, they found Ranjeet hanging on a rope noose from a tree on the bank of Borgaon drain about 100 mtrs. away from the Motorcycle. The informant further stated that he informed Bhagwan Singh - father of Ranjeet Singh.
4. That during inquest under Section 174 Cr.P.C, a written suicide- note and a mobile were found. The suicide-note mentioned about the deceased being harassed by the appellant - Mahendra Awase. Statements of witnesses were recorded. A chargesheet came to be filed on 21.01.2023. The chargesheet mentioned that the appellant had committed offences punishable under Section 306 of the IPC.
5. The suicide note reads as under:-
“I Ranjeet Singh s/o Bhagwan Singh Chauhan "illegible" taking my life on my own because life will help me in taking my problems for which I have to take this step.
I did loan for one Ritesh Malakar in which as witness my cheques were attached for reason of which Awase, person who give and take loan is harassing much for this reason I have to take this step.
Sd/-
Ranjeet Singh
10.10.2022”
[Emphasis supplied]
Apart from the suicide note, it further transpires that statements of witnesses were recorded to the effect that the deceased was staying disturbed for the past few months and when asked he had mentioned to them that Mahendra Awase, the appellant was harassing him with respect to repayment of a loan which one Ritesh Malakar had taken from Shree Saakh Cooperative Society Limited, Khargone.
6. It further transpires that the forensic laboratory had confirmed certain audio recordings of the conversation between the deceased and the appellant. Transcripts of the conversation were also produced.
7. The transcripts are extracted hereinbelow, as is available from the Panchnama:-
| “Speaker 1: Deceased Shumbam @ Ranjit son of Bhagwan Singh Chauhan, caste Rajput, aged 26 years, resident of Temla. Speaker 2: Mahender Awasey, resident of Janki Nagar, Khargone. The data of mobile obtained from the Cyber Forensic Unit, Khargone is perused and protected in aforesaid Pen Drive (DGNET 24 GB, F22) in a Lab Case 80-22>2022-12-05. 16-22-36>Lab Case 80-22 Exbt. A> files>recorded Audio in the file being AUD-20221010- WA0007 which is prepared on 10.10.2022 at 07:26 AM being of 151 KB before the aforementioned Panchas and transcripted thereof as under:
|
(1) Abetment of suicide – Act of abetment must be proved and established by prosecution before he could be convicted under Section 306 IPC.(2) Hyperboles employed in exchanges should not, without any....
The court established that mere financial distress and harassment do not constitute abetment of suicide under IPC Section 306 without clear intent to instigate such a decision.
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be direct acts of incitement closely linked to the suicide, and mere denial of marriage does not constitute abetment.
To establish abetment of suicide under IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or aiding, which was absent in this case.
To establish abetment under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear intent and direct actions by the accused that compel the victim to commit suicide; emotional distress alone is insufficient.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of specific intent and the absence of evidence of instigation or intentional aid in the commission of suicide under Section 306 of ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
