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

2026 Supreme(MP) 700

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
Pushpendra Yadav, J.
Rinku Lodha – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 13 of 2023
Decided On : 19-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Shri Manvardhan Singh Tomar, Advocate
For the Respondent: Shri Vikram Pippal, PP

Abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC requires a positive act of instigation with mens rea, leaving the deceased with no other option. Mere demand for repayment of a loan or possession of property does not constitute instigation to commit suicide.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 107 and 306 - Abetment of suicide - Whether demand for repayment of loan and keeping property constitutes instigation - To constitute an offence under Section 306, there must be a positive act of instigation or aid with mens rea (Paras 10, 11) - Words spoken in a fit of anger or a mere demand for money cannot be termed as instigation to commit suicide (Paras 10, 15) - An overt act must be such that the victim is left with no option but to commit suicide (Para 12) - Mere demand for return of money does not ordinarily drive a person to take extreme steps, as the purpose of recovery would be frustrated by the death of the debtor (Para 16).

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 397 and 401 - Scope of Revision - Interference with the order of framing of charges - When the essential ingredients of the offence are missing even on a prima facie basis, the accused cannot be compelled to face trial unnecessarily (Paras 17, 18).

Facts of the case:
The deceased committed suicide by hanging. Allegations were made by relatives that the petitioner harassed the deceased for the repayment of a loan and had kept the deceased's motorcycle. No suicide note was recovered from the spot. Based on the statements of relatives, the trial court framed charges under Section 306 of the IPC.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the act of demanding money back or keeping the motorcycle does not constitute an overt act of instigation or abetment. There was no evidence of mens rea to push the deceased into a position where they had no option but to commit suicide.

Issues: Whether the action of demanding repayment of a loan and keeping the deceased's motorcycle amounts to abetment of suicide under Sections 107 and 306 of the IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: For framing of charges under Section 306 IPC, there must be a clear mens rea and a positive act of instigation that leaves the deceased with no other option. A mere demand for money does not constitute such an act, as it lacks the intention to incite the person to commit suicide and is generally contrary to the creditor's interest in recovering the debt.

Result: Revision petition allowed and the impugned order is hereby set aside.

Legal Category Hierarchy

  • crime and sentencing
    • offences against the person
  • practice and procedure
    • criminal procedure
      • revision (Para 1, 18)
      • framing of charge (Para 1, 4, 14, 16, 17, 18)

Table of Contents

1. Death by suicide — Abetment charge under Section 306 IPC — Challenge to framing of charge. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 )

2. Petitioner: no abetment; mere loan demand not instigation. Prosecution: harassment compelled suicide, thus prima facie case made out. (Para 4 , 5 )

3. Revision allowed; impugned order set aside; charge under Section 306 IPC quashed. (Para 17 , 18 )

4. What constitutes abetment within Section 107 IPC for an offence under Section 306 IPC?

Abetment requires instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid; mere demand for repayment of a loan, without more, does not satisfy the definition of instigation under Section 107 IPC. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 15 )

5. Can words uttered in a fit of anger amount to instigation for abetment of suicide?

No; words spoken in a fit of anger or during an emotional quarrel lack the requisite mens rea and do not constitute instigation as defined in Section 107 IPC. (Para 10 , 15 )

6. What standard must the overt act of an accused meet to sustain a charge under Section 306 IPC?

The overt act must be of such a nature that it leaves the deceased with no option but to commit suicide; a mere demand for money or keeping a motorcycle as security does not meet this standard. (Para 12 , 16 )

7. Does a demand for repayment of a loan constitute harassment for the purpose of abetting suicide?

No; demanding repayment of a loan, or threatening in connection with such demand, cannot be held to be a provocation for committing suicide under Section 107 IPC. (Para 13 , 16 )

ORDER :

Pushpendra Yadav, J.

The present criminal revision has been filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C against the order dated 08.12.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Guna in ST No.241/2022, whereby charge under Section 306 of IPC was framed against the petitioner.

2. In nutshell, case of the prosecution is that on 13.09.2022 around 9 PM, one Bhagwan Singh committed suicide by hanging himself at cement pillar situated in Mata Temple, Guna. On 14.09.2022 at 1:53 AM "merg intimation no.96/2022" regarding un-natural death of Bhagwan Singh was recorded at P.S., Guna by Devendra Singh Lodha (brother of the deceased) inter-alia stating that reason for suicide is unknown to him. No suicide note was recovered from the spot.

3. During investigation, the police recorded the statements of five relatives of the deceased and two other persons. The relatives of the deceased in their statements levelled allegations against the petitioner that deceased Bhagwan Singh borrowed Rs.1 lakh from the petitioner and he harassed the deceased for demanding repayment of the loan amount. On the date of incident i.e. on 13.09.2022 the petitioner kept the motorcycle of the deceased and due to the said harassment he committed suicide. After investigation charge-sheet (annexure P/2) was filed. The charge under Section 306 of IPC was framed by the Court below vide order dated 08.12.2022 which is under challenge in the present revision.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned Court below framed the charges under Section 306 of IPC without considering the fact that the essential ingredients for constituting an offence under Section 306 of IPC of abatement by the accused person are missing. In the present case there is no such abetment on the part of petitioner to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the demand of repayment of loan amount or the alleged threatening in connection with the demand of money cannot be said to be a provocation for committing suicide under Section 107 of IPC. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon order of this Court passed in CRR No.3155/2019 dated 09.07.2019 ( Rajesh s/o Mathuradas Advani vs. State of M.P. ). Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on the spot no suicide note was recovered and the charges have been framed only on the basis of statements of relatives. If statements of all the relatives of deceased, taken in toto, even then they do not constitute offence of abetment to commit suicide.

5. Per contra, prosecution has opposed the prayer and submitted that the wife of deceased disclosed before the police the reason of suicide and other witnesses have supported her statement, therefore, prima facie sufficient evidence is available on record for framing charges. From the statements it has come on record that on account of harassment by the petitioner for demand of money, the deceased has committed suicide, thus, it cannot be said that necessary factors for invoking Section 306 of IPC are absent and prayed for dismissal of the present revision.

6. I have heard the parties at length and perused the record.

7. The moot question in the present case is that even if the entire allegations are accepted as they are, then whether it can be said that the petitioner has committed an offence of abetment of suicide.

Before dealing with the matter, it would be apt to consider relevant provisions and judgments on the point.

8. For ready reference Section 306 of IPC is quoted herein below:-

306. Abetment of suicide.—If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

9. "Abetment" defined under Section 107 of IPC reads as under:-

107. Abetment of a thing.—A person abets the doing of a thing, who.

(i)-Instigates any person to do that thing; or

(ii)- Engage

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