Refusal to marry or failure to respond to messages does not constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC unless there is a positive, active act of instigation with a direct and proximate link to the death.

J U D G M E N T

1. By virtue of the present bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the applicant seeks grant of anticipatory bail in proceedings arising from FIR No.503/2025 dated 13.08.2025 registered at PS.: Punjabi Bagh, Delhi under Sections 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

2. As per FIR, on 09.05.2023, the complainant’s daughter ended her life by hanging herself from a ceiling fan at her residence after writing two suicide notes. Though she was immediately taken to a nearby hospital, where she was declared brought dead. During inspection, the investigating team seized two suicide notes, two notebooks, and the deceased’s mobile phone from the scene. The anal and vaginal swabs sent for FSL showed no presence of semen, and the post‑mortem report confirmed the cause of death as

asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. The suicide notes, which upon confirmation by the FSL report, attributed the deceased’s decision to end her life to the applicant and his family members, alleging that the applicant had misled her for two years, promised marriage and later withdrew under family pressure, and had also established physical relations with her. Upon an application filed by the deceased’s parents under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., the present FIR was registered pursuant to the order dated 12.08.2025 passed by the learned Trial Court.

3. Mr. Sarthak Tomar, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the Instagram and WhatsApp chats exchanged between the deceased and the applicant soon before her death on 09.05.2023 have not been subjected to FSL verification. Even otherwise, there are no messages sent by the applicant therein. Moreover, the aspect of refusal to marry by the applicant and that he had gotten engaged to another woman are also without any support. In any event, the applicant got married nearly three years after the alleged incident, i.e. two months before registration of the present FIR. As per Kamruddin Dastagir Sanadi vs. State of Karnataka , (Crl. App. No.551/2012) and Yadwinder Singh @ Sunny vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (Crl. No.7309/2025), even assuming that the applicant declined to marry the deceased, such refusal does not, by itself, constitute instigation or abetment to commit suicide. Moreover, there was no positive/ active act on the part of the applicant which directly led to commission of suicide by the deceased. Hence, in the absence of a clear mens rea and an active/ direct act

on behalf of the applicant, the essential ingredients regarding abetment of suicide under Section 306 of IPC have not been made out.

4. Per contra, Mr. Satish Kumar learned APP for the State relying upon the Status Report, submitted that the deceased and applicant were admittedly in a relationship for nearly two years prior to the incident, and their families had met, and expressed agreement towards their marriage. Recovery of two suicide notes written by the deceased, and which are confirmed by the FSL report, clearly spell out the reason of suicide attributable to the applicant’s refusal to marry her and the opposition from his parents. Further, the WhatsApp messages exchanged on the date of the incident show that the deceased was repeatedly requesting the applicant to speak with her, to which the applicant offered no response.

5. Lastly, the learned APP submitted that the applicant joined the investigation only twice that too pursuant to di