The Supreme Court quashed an FIR registered against an advocate accused under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that mere refusal to marry, even if it causes emotional distress to the other person, cannot be treated as “instigation” within the meaning of Section 107 IPC. The Court observed that “without a positive act of instigation or aiding in the act of suicide, conviction cannot be sustained.”
Brief Facts:
The case arose from an FIR filed by the mother of a deceased woman, a government advocate in Amritsar, alleging that her daughter took her life after being emotionally and physically exploited by the accused, also an advocate, who had allegedly promised marriage but later backed out due to family opposition.
According to the complainant, her daughter had developed a close relationship with the accused and was emotionally attached to him. However, when he declined to marry her despite earlier assurances, she consumed poison and died during treatment at a hospital. A supplementary statement later alleged that the accused had exploited her physically on the pretext of marriage and had shown indifference when she expressed her intention to take her life.
Contentions:
The counsel for the appellant argued that even if the prosecution’s case was accepted as true, the allegations did not constitute the offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC. It was contended that the deceased’s decision to take the extreme step was a result of personal disappointment, not direct instigation or intentional aid by the appellant.
The State opposed the plea, contending that the accused’s conduct and refusal to marry after a long relationship amounted to mental cruelty, which drove the deceased to suicide.
Observations of the Court:
The Bench referred to its earlier decisions in Nipun Aneja v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan, and S.S. Cheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan, reiterating the settled principles governing abetment of suicide.
Quoting from S.S. Cheena, the Court emphasized, “Abetment involves a mental process of instigating or intentionally aiding a person in doing a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained.”
The Court further clarified that “the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 306 IPC would stand fulfilled only if the suicide is a direct consequence of an alarming and deliberate act of incitement, leaving no option but to commit suicide.”
Referring to the facts, the Bench observed that while the incident was “deeply unfortunate,” the accused’s refusal to marry due to family pressure did not amount to “instigation” or “intentional aid” to suicide. The Court remarked, “It is possible that the deceased might have felt hurt. One sensitive moment took away the life of a young girl. However, we must decide on the evidence before us. Mere refusal to marry, even if true, cannot amount to instigation under Section 107 IPC.”
The decision of the Court:
Allowing the appeal, the Apex Court quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings pending before the Sessions Court at Amritsar. The Bench held that continuing the trial would amount to a “travesty of justice” since no ingredients of abetment were satisfied. The judgment concluded by noting that while the loss of life was tragic, “criminal law cannot be invoked to punish emotional disappointment unless supported by clear evidence of instigation or intentional aid".
Case Title: Yadwinder Singh @Sunny vs. State of Punjab & Anr.
Case No.: Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.7309 of 2025
Coram: Justice J.B. Pardiwala, Justice K.V. Viswanathan
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. P. S. Patwalia (Sr. Adv.), Deveshi Chand, Agam Aggarwal, Chritarth Palli (AOR)
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Karan Sharma (AOR)
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
