State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Nisar Mohd

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 107 and 306 - Abetment of suicide - To sustain a conviction under Section 306, the prosecution must establish a clear mens rea and a positive act of instigation, goading, or aiding the deceased to commit suicide - Mere harassment, by itself, is insufficient unless it is accompanied by deliberate acts of incitement or facilitation proximate to the time of the incident (Paras 24, 25 and 26).

(B) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 313 - Examination of accused - Any evidence or forensic report not put to the accused during the examination under Section 313 cannot be utilized by the prosecution to establish guilt (Para 11).

(C) Appeal - Scope of interference in acquittal - An appellate court should not substitute its own view for that of the trial court unless the findings are perverse, illegal, or impossible - If two views are possible based on the evidence, the view favorable to the accused must be adopted (Paras 27 and 28).

(D) Evidentiary Value - Suicide Note - A document that does not explicitly state an intention to commit suicide and is seized with significant unexplained delay from a third party, rather than the deceased, remains doubtful and cannot be treated as a conclusive suicide note (Paras 18 and 19).

Facts of the case:
A man committed suicide by consuming a poisonous substance following protracted matrimonial disputes and legal proceedings involving his wife and her family. The prosecution alleged that the in-laws exerted immense pressure and harassed the deceased, compelling him to end his life. A document was produced by the prosecution as a suicide note, and testimonies were provided by family members regarding the harassment. The trial court acquitted the accused persons of the charges under Section 306 of the IPC, which led to the present appeal by the State.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the cause of death was not established with cogent evidence as the forensic report was not presented to the accused during the Section 313 examination. The alleged suicide note was seized with a significant delay and its authenticity was doubtful. Furthermore, the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses regarding the instigation were contradictory and lacked specific details or documented proof of threats.

Issues: Whether the findings of the trial court acquitting the accused were perverse or illegal and whether there was sufficient evidence of a positive act of abetment to justify a conviction under Section 306 of the IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: Abetment requires a mental process of instigating or intentionally aiding the act; without a proximate prior act serving as the direct cause of suicide, a conviction cannot stand. In appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must demonstrate a clear illegality or perversity in the lower court's decision to reverse the judgment, as the benefit of a plausible view must be given to the accused.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Legal Category Hierarchy

1. Appeal by State against acquittal under Section 306 IPC for abetment of suicide — deceased allegedly consumed poison after marital harassment and in-laws' refusal to send wife back. (Para 2 , 3 )

ORDER :

Rajendra Kumar Vani, J.

This appeal under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the State assailing the judgment and order of acquittal dated 10.08.2015 passed in S.T. No.49/2011(State of M.P. vs. Nisar Mohd. and others) by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Chhattarpur (M.P.) whereby respondents/accused have been acquitted of the offence under Section 306 of IPC.

2. As per the prosecution case, the deceased Wasim was married to Shaheen in the year 2008 at Manihari Mohalla, Chhattarpur. After the marriage, the in-laws of the deceased used to frequently visit his house to take Shaheen with them; however, the deceased did not permit her to leave the matrimonial home. On 15.10.2009, the brother of Shaheen, namely Riyaz, took her to Chhatarpur on the pretext of attending his engagement ceremony, but thereafter did not send her back to the matrimonial home of the deceased. Subsequently, Shaheen filed a maintenance petition against the deceased and also initiated other legal proceedings. It is further alleged that whenever the deceased went to his in-laws’ house to bring Shaheen back, she was not sent with him. On 14.10.2010, deceased Wasim reached the house of his in-laws at Chhattarpur and committed suicide by consuming a poisonous substance. Upon receipt of information, a Marg intimation was registered and an inquest was conducted under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

3. During the course of investigation, dead body of the deceased was duly identified and a Panchnama was prepared. The postmortem examination of the deceased was conducted, wherein the doctor opined that the cause of death was consumption of poisonous substance. On lodging of the FIR, the criminal law was triggered and set in motion.

4 . After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was submitted in the competent court, which on its turn committed the case to the court of session where the respondents/accused were tried.

5 . The learned Trial Judge on the basis of the averments made against the accused in the charge sheet framed charge punishable under Section 306 of IPC. The respondents abjured their guilt. They took the plea that they have been falsely implicated in the matter and they claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution, in order to bring home the charges examined as many as 15 witnesses, which are Munnilal (PW-1), Dr. S.K.Gupta (PW-2), Maharaj Singh (PW-3), Naeem Soudagar (PW-4), Rahil Soudagar (PW-5), Smt. Fajlun Nisha (PW-6), Ramavtar Chorasiya (PW-7), Mod. Nawab (PW-8), Naseem Soudagar (PW-9), Gopal Das (PW-10), Dr. B.M. Chourasiya (PW-11), Praveen Kumar Singh (PW-12), J.D. Verma (PW-13), A.K. Poranik (PW-14) and Ashok Valmiki (PW-15) and placed Ex.P/1 to P/31, documents on record.

7. The learned Trial Court after appreciating and marshalling the evidence came to hold that the allegations levelled against the accused are not found to be proved and eventually acquitted the accused persons/respondents of the charges under Section 306 of IPC. Hence, this appeal.

8. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the present appellant/State that the learned trial Court has erroneously acquitted the respondents/accused persons, despite the prosecution having adduced cogent and reliable evidence. From the prosecution evidence on record, it is clearly revealed that the accused persons exerted immense pressure upon the deceased and did not allow him to reside peacefully with his wife. As a result of such continuous harassment and pressure, the deceased was compelled to commit suicide. In this regard, document Ex.P/16, which is a suicide note, was seized by the police. Keeping in view the suicide note, coupled with the statements of the prosecution witnesses, the offence under Section 306 of the IPC is clearly made out against the accused persons. The suicide note was written by the deceased himself, which in fact stands duly substantiated by the evidence of handwriting expert, K.K. Puranik (PW-14). Hence, the acquittal of the accuse

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(MP) 675

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Rajendra Kumar Vani, J.
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Petitioner
Versus
Nisar Mohd And Others – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2236 of 2016
Decided On : 15-01-2026

Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires positive evidence of mens rea and a proximate act of instigation; mere harassment is insufficient. In appeals against acquittal, the Trial Court's view prevails unless it is perverse, illegal, or constitutes a clear error of law or fact.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

Judicial Analysis

2026 Supreme(MP) 675

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPURRajendra Kumar Vani, J.The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Petitioner VersusNisar Mohd And Others – Respondent Criminal Appeal No. 2236 of 2016Decided On : 15-01-2026

Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires positive evidence of mens rea and a proximate act of instigation; mere harassment is insufficient. In appeals against acquittal, the Trial Court's view prevails unless it is perverse, illegal, or constitutes a clear error of law or fact.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

Cases Referred (4)

Judicial Analysis

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Rajendra Kumar Vani, J.
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Petitioner
Versus
Nisar Mohd And Others – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2236 of 2016
Decided On : 15-01-2026