2025 Supreme(SC) 1211

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B. R. GAVAI, CJI., K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ.
Abhinav Mohan Delkar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 2177-2185 of 2024
Decided On : 18-08-2025

IMPORTANT POINT
Abetment of suicide – What drove victim to that extreme act, often depends on individual predilections – Merely because victim was continuously harassed and at one point, he or she succumbed to extreme act of taking his life cannot by itself result in finding a positive instigation constituting abetment.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 306 read with Section 107 [Sections 108 and 45 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023] – Abetment of suicide – Even if there is allegation of constant harassment, continued over a long period; to bring in ingredients of Section 306 read with Section 107, still there has to be proximate prior act to clearly find that suicide was direct consequence of such continuous harassment, last proximate incident having finally driven subject to extreme act of taking one’s life – What drove victim to that extreme act, often depends on individual predilections – Merely because victim was continuously harassed and at one point, he or she succumbed to extreme act of taking his life cannot by itself result in finding a positive instigation constituting abetment – Mens rea cannot be gleaned merely by what goes on in mind of accused – What constitutes mens rea is intention and purpose of alleged perpetrator as discernible from conscious acts or words and attendant circumstances, which in all probability could lead to such an end – Real intention of accused and whether he intended by his action to at least possibly drive the victim to suicide, is the sure test – Social status, community setting, relationship between parties and other myriad factors would distinguish one case from another – However, harsh or severe harassment, unless there is a conscious deliberate intention, mens rea, to drive another person to suicidal death, there cannot be a finding of abetment under Section 306. (Paras 22 and 23)

(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 306 read with Section 107 [Sections 108 and 45 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023] – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 113A & 113B – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 [Section 528 of BNSS] – Abetment of suicide – Only private individual arrayed as accused in FIR was accused of circulating defamatory video clips on social media platforms – Deceased was no ordinary person, though he had his roots in a marginalised community – There is no allegation of any public humiliation on the basis of caste or a casteist slur having been spoken – Insofar as allegation of circulation of news items and videos, as alleged against a private individual, deceased had issued legal notice alleging defamation – Allegation of extortion has never been raised, either in complaint to Speaker or in statements made before Privileges Committee – If executive officers are disrespectful to a Parliamentarian, people’s representative is entitled to demand and get his due status recognised by virtue of legislative office he holds and also electoral support he retains – A person unable to bear pressure or withstand a humiliation or unable to oppose, may succumb to extreme act of ending his own life, in desperation; but that would not necessarily mean that alleged perpetrator had an intention to lead victim to eventual death by his own or her own hands – There arises cloud on suicide note, when looking at admitted statements recorded in proceedings of Committee of Privileges and also manner in which note was introduced in the case – Before Committee of Privileges, no reference was made to various allegations in suicide note, against named officers – FIR rightly quashed by High Court. (Paras 29, 30, 34, 37, 40 and 41)

Facts of the case:

A seven-time Member of Parliament committed suicide on 22.02.2021, leaving behind a suicide note which named persons, both in administration and police, who according to him, conspired to defame, degrade and demean him so as to end his political career and bring down his social standing, thus driving him to suicide; which he proclaimed in his last note, was his only option.

Findings of Court:

We have found suicide note to be suspect and we are not convinced that there is any modicum of material in the case to find abetment of suicide. High Court was not in error, when it quashed FIR, when no case is made out from the FIR.

Result : Criminal Appeals dismissed.