THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10922 of 2025

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioners/accused Nos.3, 4, 6 and 7 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in P.R.C.No.23 of 2025on the file of learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Narayanpet, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 108 read with 49 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

2. Heard Sri S.Vijay Prasanth, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are facing false allegations and have never abetted the suicide of the alleged victim. He further submitted that the allegations regarding the petitioners entering into an alliance with the daughter of the victim, and subsequently cancelling the said alliance, leading to unbearable humiliation which allegedly caused the victim’s suicide, are wholly baseless and false. He further submitted that petitioners never abetted the suicide of the victim and they cannot be dragged to the Courts with the false allegations. Hence, he prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the statements of circumstantial witnesses are recorded as a part of investigation and that the parents of the girl have knowledge about the love affair of the girl but they still fixed the alliance with the son of the deceased and just prior to the marriage the girl has eloped with another person and by that time they made all the arrangements for marriage and also cards were distributed, with the unbearable humiliation the deceased committed suicide on the next morning. He further submitted that there is a prime facie case against the petitioners. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.

5. Perused the record. The contents of the complaint reveal that the engagement function between the son of the deceased and accused No.1 was solemnized at a function hall, and the marriage date was fixed accordingly, following which wedding cards were distributed. However, on 05.05.2025, accused No.1 married another person, which caused damage to the reputation of the victim’s family. Unable to bear the humiliation, the deceased who is the brother of the de-facto complainant, committed suicide. In this context, it is pertinent to refer to the decision of the Apex Court relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners in Rajesh v. State of Haryana, (2020) 15 Supreme Court Cases 359, wherein it was held as follows:

“9. Conviction under Section 306 IPC is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide. In order to being a case within the purview of Section 306 IPC, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the persons who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. Therefore, the act of abetment by the person charged with the said offence must be proved

and established by the prosecution before he could be convicted under Section 306 IPC”.

6. He further also relied upon S.S.Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan and another, )2010) 12 SCC 190, wherein it was held as follows:

"25. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. The intention of the legislature and the