Refusal to marry alone does not equate to abetment of suicide; substantial evidence of instigation is necessary.

O R D E R :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner-accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him in Spl.S.C.No.12 of 2023 on the file of the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Medchal (for short ‘trial Court’), registered for the offence under Section

306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘ IPC ’).

2. Heard Mr. G.Ravi Chandran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. Inspite of service of notice, there is no representation for respondent No.2. Perused the record.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the petitioner and deceased are in relationship since 15 years and both of them intended to marry. Later, when the petitioner refused to marry her, the deceased committed suicide by hanging.

4. Basing on the complaint lodged by de facto complainant, who is the sister of deceased, the Police registered a crime for the offence under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. During the course of investigation, basing on the strength of statements of witnesses, the Investigating Officer has altered the Section of Law to 306 of IPC . After completion of investigation, the Police filed charge sheet against the petitioner for the offence under Section 306 of IPC before the trial Court, the same was taken cognizance and numbered as Spl.S.C.No.12 of 2023.

5. Submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner:

5.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the petitioner and deceased are in relationship for more than 15 years. The petitioner and deceased are in good terms and she never expressed any problems to him during her life time. The petitioner never denied to marry the deceased but only requested her to wait for some time due to existing family obligations. Even if the allegations of the petitioner disapproving for the marriage are taken to be true, it does not amount to offence under Section 306 of IPC . He further submits that the petitioner had reprimanded the de facto complainant for wanting to marry a person of bad character and took responsibility to find her a suitable match. Despite her deceased sister also advising her to follow his guidance, she rebelled. Holding a grudge, she has falsely implicated him in her sister’s death. There is no suicide note, to the best of the petitioner’s knowledge, indicating any role played by him in the deceased’s suicide. No specific overt act is attributed to the petitioner to show that he has abetted or instigated the deceased to commit suicide hence the ingredients of offence under Section 306 of IPC are not made out. Most of the witnesses are family members of the de facto complainant and they are interested witnesses.

5.2. In support of his contention, learned counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu v. State of West Bengal , [(2010) 1 SCC 707], wherein, the parameters of Section 306 of IPC are explained in the following terms:

“12. Thus, this Court has consistently taken the view that before holding an accused guilty of an offence under Section 306 IPC , the court must scrupulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced before it in order to find out whether the cruelty and harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with no other alternative but to put an end to her life. It is also to be born