The Supreme Court of India recently clarified that simply disapproving of a marriage does not constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
This observation came while the court was hearing a case involving a woman who had been accused of abetting the suicide of another woman. The deceased woman was allegedly in love with the appellant’s son, who had refused to marry her.
The dispute between the deceased and the appellant’s son was central to the case. It was claimed that the appellant had expressed her disapproval of the marriage and had made negative remarks about the deceased.
However, the Supreme Court found no substantial evidence to support the accusation that the appellant’s actions had directly led to the woman’s suicide.
A bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma reviewed the chargesheet, witness statements, and other evidence in the case.
The court concluded that even if all the allegations were accepted as true, there was no concrete evidence that the appellant's actions could be classified as abetment of suicide.
The court emphasised that there must be a direct or indirect act that creates an environment in which the deceased feels pushed to the point of taking their own life. In this case, the justices noted that the appellant did not engage in any action that left the deceased with no other option but to commit suicide.
The bench further highlighted that the deceased’s family was unhappy with the relationship, not the appellant’s family. The disapproval of the appellant, therefore, was not seen as an act of instigating suicide.
The court specifically pointed out that a remark such as “if you cannot live without marrying your lover, then don’t be alive” does not qualify as abetment, as there was no positive action that could have pushed the deceased towards such an extreme act.
The ruling provided clarity on the scope of Section 306, which deals with abetment of suicide.
It affirmed that expressing disapproval, even in strong terms, does not amount to a criminal act unless there is a direct connection between the disapproval and the act of suicide. Therefore, the charge of abetment of suicide cannot be sustained on the basis of such disapproval alone.
In this case, the charges against the woman were quashed, and the court concluded that her actions were too remote and indirect to meet the legal criteria for abetment under Section 306.
This decision underscores the importance of establishing a direct link between the alleged actions of the accused and the tragic outcome of suicide before criminal liability can be established.
Follow us
