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

2025 Supreme(Raj) 2350

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J.
Smt. Anita Mathur, W/o. Shri Bhvanesh Mathur – Petitioner 
Versus
State of Rajasthan, represented through Public Prosecutor – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 9538 of 2022 
Decided On : 03-12-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. V.R. Bajwa, Sr. Adv. assisted by Ms. Savita Nathawat, Mr. Prateek Mathur & Ms. Kritika Singh Mr. Sanjeev Johri, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Shubhankar Joshi
For the Respondent: Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP
For the Complainant : Mr. Rajesh Sharma

For abetment of suicide under IPC Section 306, clear and proximate evidence of instigation or aid from the accused is essential; mere allegations in a civil dispute are insufficient.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 306 - Quashing of FIR for abetment of suicide - The court held that there was no direct nexus between the alleged harassment and the suicide, as reflected in the suicide note and the time lapse since complaints were filed - Mere existence of a civil dispute and general allegations of harassment do not constitute abetment of suicide. (Paras 8, 12, 19, 21)

(B) Abetment of Suicide - Legal standards - To attract Section 306 IPC, there must be clear intention from the accused to drive the deceased to suicide, which requires concrete evidence of instigation or aiding. (Paras 11, 18, 19)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners are involved in a family dispute concerning property, and the complainant alleges harassment led to the suicide of the deceased, Yash Mathur, who left behind a suicide note attributing multiple pressures for his decision. The FIR was quashed due to insufficient evidence connecting the petitioners to the act of abetment.

Findings of Court:
FIR No. 312/2021 and subsequent legal proceedings were quashed, ruling that the allegations did not substantiate charges under Section 306 IPC.

Issues: The main question was whether the actions of the petitioners constituted instigation or abetment leading to the suicide of the deceased.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that a mere civil dispute and prior complaints do not suffice to establish abetment, emphasizing the necessity of a close and direct causal link between actions of the accused and the suicide.

Result: FIR quashed.

Order :

ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J.

1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), seeking the quashing of First Information Report (FIR) No.312/2021. This FIR was registered at Police Station, Bhatta Basti, District Jaipur City (North), for offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code ( IPC ).

2. The brief facts of the case are that the aforesaid FIR was lodged on 11.10.2021, on the complaint submitted by Smt. Neeta Mathur who is respondent No. 2 in this petition. It is stated by the complainant in her complaint that herself, her husband Shri Sunil Mathur, and her son Yash Mathur were residing in House No.4 D- 22 Housing Board, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur. She further mentioned that her sister-in-law, Smt. Anita Mathur, had visited Jaipur for the last rites of the complainant’s father-in-law. It is alleged that, shortly before the death, Smt. Anita Mathur took advantage of her father-in-law's ill health to prepare a forged and fabricated Will concerning the house and multiple bank accounts. It is also alleged that this Will was subsequently utilized to file a civil suit aimed at usurping ornaments kept in a bank locker and the residential property. The FIR also specifies that Smt. Anita Mathur had filed several false complaints in the police station with intention to get them evicted from the aforementioned house. It is also alleged in the complaint that when the complainant’s son, Yash Mathur, was selected for the Indian Air Force, Smt. Anita Mathur filed a false complaint against him, allegedly to pressurize the family. Due to this very reason, his son was unable to complete his police verification, thereby stressing about his future, and consequently slid into depression. The FIR finally alleges that, despite counseling from friends, relatives, neighbours, and his father, the son frustrated by the continuous complaints filed against him, committed suicide on 10.10.2021, between approximately 5:00-5:30PM.

3. Before moving on, it is also pertinent to take note that the complainant-respondent No.2 in her reply to this petition has also brought the notice of this Court to a suicide note left by the deceased and same is being reproduced as under:-

I am Quitting because I am tired from my life since childhood. I have always seen my parents fighting on Different issues which makes me weak from inside But there love for me bring me energy too. Since 2013 After my Grandfather's death everything become Worst. My Aunty (Bhua) make our life like hell Since then everything became worse. She filed fake case & police complains to tease us. She passes out many negative comments at many moment This all make my mother mentally ill. She got an Brain Hamarage because of this shit. My Parents became fustrated & After Corona Our Economic Condition also get very low. So these circumstances forced me to do this Action. I am sorry mumma... I Love You

Yash Mathur"

4. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that bare perusal of the FIR would reveal that no case under Section 306 of IPC is made out against the petitioners. Learned senior counsel argues that the suicide note, if taken at face value would further reveal that there is no direct nexus between the incident and the alleged harassment by petitioner No.1. Learned senior counsel averred that a civil dispute is going on between the parties and such a civil suit and a complaint to the SHO cannot possibly be considered harassment as the petitioner is exercising the legal remedies available to her. Learned senior counsel finally contended that due to reasons such as huge gap between the complaints against the deceased and the deceased committing suicide, coupled with several other problems the deceased had already been going through, it cannot be said that the petitioners in any way induced or abetted the deceased to commit suicide.

5. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitio

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