SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(HP) 58

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA, J.
Narotma Devi - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. MP (M) No. 2991 of 2025
Decided On : 03-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan Sr. Advocate with Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr.Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar Additional Advocate Generals, Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banstu, Deputy Advocates Generals.
Mr. Pranav Sharma, Advocate, for the complainant.
ASI Vijay Sharma, P.S Barotiwala present in person

Mere scolding by teacher for poor academic performance does not constitute abetment of suicide under Section 108(B) BNS absent intention to instigate; no reasonable foresight of extreme outcome. Bail granted post complete investigation.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Section 108

(B) - Abetment of suicide - Mere scolding of students by teacher for poor performance in test does not amount to abetment or instigation absent intention or mens rea to provoke suicide - Students unanimously state teacher scolded equally for poor marks, no singling out or humiliation - No medical evidence linking scolding to death, no suicide note, delayed FIR registration raises doubt - Prosecution must prove intention at trial - Teacher discharging disciplinary duty cannot foresee extreme outcome. (Paras 5,6,7,8)

(B) Bail - Principles - Presumption of innocence till guilt proved - Investigation complete, full cooperation, nothing to recover - No risk of fleeing or tampering if conditions imposed - Object of bail to secure trial attendance, not punishment - Normal rule is bail not jail - Gravity alone not ground to deny. (Paras 9-13)

Facts of the case:
Deceased student allegedly scolded publicly by teacher for not preparing for test. Taken to hospital after three days, discharged, later died consuming poison. Father alleged mental torture via son. FIR lodged seven days later. Students deny humiliation in statements. Petitioner teacher on interim bail, cooperating fully.

Findings of Court:
No evidence of instigation; scolding routine discipline. Students confirm equal treatment. No reasonable foresight of suicide. Bail made absolute with stringent conditions.

Issues: Whether scolding constitutes abetment under Section 108

(B)? Whether regular bail to be granted post-investigation?

Ratio Decidendi: Section 108

(B) requires specific intention to instigate suicide, absent here as scolding was disciplinary without foreseeability of suicide; matter for trial but insufficient grounds to deny bail given material on record.

Result: Interim bail order made absolute subject to bail bonds and conditions.

Table of Content
1. investigation complete; petitioner fully cooperative. (Para 1 , 2)
2. risk of evidence tampering and crime repetition. (Para 3)
3. routine scolding; no evidence of targeted humiliation. (Para 4 , 5)
4. delayed fir; scolding not causative of suicide. (Para 6 , 7)
5. mere scolding lacks intent for abetment. (Para 8)
6. innocence presumed; bail rule not exception. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
7. bail absolute subject to conditions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Sequel to order dated 22.12.2025, whereby the petitioner, who is teacher by occupation, was ordered to be enlarged on interim bail in case FIR No.165 of 2025 dated 05.12.2025 registered at Police Station Barotiwala, Distt. Solan, H.P under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, respondent/State has filed status report and ASI Vijay Sharma, P.S Barotiwala has come present with record. Petitioner is also present along with her counsel. Record perused and retained.

2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General on instructions of investigating officer, present in the Court, states that pursuant to order dated 22.12.2025, petitioner herein has been joining the investigation regularly and she has fully cooperated. He further states that investigation in the case is complete and nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner and as such, this court may pass appropriate order and in the event of making the interim order absolute, this Court may direct petitioner to join investigation as and when directed.

3. Mr. Pranav Sharma, learned counsel representing complainant, while vehemently opposing the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that minor child of complainant committed suicide after her being subjected to mental torture and harassment by the petitioner. He states that investigation has been not conducted fairly because investigating officer did not record the statements of other students rather gave one questionnaire to the students, which has been answered as the same in a stereo-typed manner. He states that since petitioner is still teaching in the school, there is every likelihood of her committing same crime and tampering with the evidence, as such, prayer made on behalf of petitioner for grant of bail deserves outright rejection.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, this Court finds that on 01.12.2025 deceased namely Rita daughter of Sh. Maan Singh was brought to Shrikant Hospital, Khera Baddi for treatment. Doctors of afore hospital after having medically examined the deceased discharged her and thereafter she was taken to home. After two days of her discharge from afore medical institution, she was taken to PGI Chandigarh but unfortunately, she passed away on account of having consumed poison. Father of the deceased alleged that on 28.11.2025, petitioner herein, had scolded and humiliated her deceased daughter in the open class for her having not prepared for test. He disclosed to the police that his son, who is also studying in the same class, was also humiliated and scolded.

5. In the afore background, FIR came to be lodged against the petitioner, who pursuant to order dated 22.12.2025 is on interim bail. Investigating officer, who is present in the Court, states that after passing of order dated 26.02.2025, he again recorded the statements of 11 students but they have again denied factum of their being scolded or humiliated, if any, by the petitioner. Record of statements brought by Investigating Officer further reveals that students of the class of deceased in unison have stated that petitioner, being teacher, had simply scolded not only the deceased but other students also who had not scored good marks in the test. Students have also stated that petitioner treats every student equal and she has never singled out a student for humiliation or harassment. Besides all of this, this court finds that medical evidence on record, nowhere suggests,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top