Mukesh Kumar Jha vs State Of U.P. And Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 33529 of 2025

Mukesh Kumar Jha
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ankita Tiwari, Sushil Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

A.F.R.
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J.
1. Heard Mr. Sushil Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned
A.G.A. for the State. Despite the fact that notice has been served upon
opposite party no.2 as per the office report dated 17th September, 2026, no
one has appeared on his/her behalf even in the revised reading of the list.
2. The instant application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. has been preferred
with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 24 of 2025
(State Vs. Mukesh Kumar Jha), arising out of Case Crime No. 176 of 2024
under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station-Khoda, District-Ghaziabad, pending
before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Ghaziabad as well
as the order dated 3rd July,2025 passed by the trial court, whereby the trial
court has rejected the discharge application of the applicant filed under
Section 227 Cr.P.C.
3. The brief facts are that a first information report has been lodged by the
informant/opposite party no.2 Vikash, brother of the deceased Jyoti against
four named accused persons including the applicant on 4th April, 2024. In the
written complaint/first information report, it has been alleged that his sister,
Jyoti Jha, whose marriage had been fixed with Mukesh Kumar Jha (applicant)
for April 21, 2024, was subjected to continuous harassment, cruelty, and
blackmail. According to the informant, substantial cash amounts totaling over
sixteen lakh rupees were paid to the groom's family on different occasions as
per their demands, yet the accused persons subsequently raised an additional
demand for a four-wheeler vehicle. When the informant's family expressed
their inability to fulfill this extra demand, the proposed marriage was

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
2
threatened with cancellation, and the groom allegedly exploited the situation
by secretly capturing intimate photographs and videos of the victim,
subsequently using them to harass and mentally break her down. The
grievance further details that driven by severe harassment, humiliation, and
the creation of obscene media intended to coerce her, the victim Jyoti Jha
(deceased) took the extreme step of ending her life by hanging from a ceiling
fan at her residence on March 30, 2024, at around 1:30 PM. The family
discovered the incident after breaking open the room, following which a
suicide note left behind by the deceased was also found, pointing towards the
culpability of the accused. Based on these allegations revealing the
commission of cognizable offences, a formal criminal case has been
registered under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code at police station Khoda,
district Ghaziabad.
4. After lodging of the aforesaid first information report, the investigation
proceeded and after completion of the same, charge-sheet under Section 306
I.P.C. has been submitted by the Investigating Officer only against the
applicant exonerating the other named accused, who are family members of
the applicant. On submission of the same, cognizance has been taken by the
court concerned and also process of summon has been issued against him.
Subsequently, the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions for trial,
which has been registered as Sessions Trial No. 24 of 2025 (State Vs.
Mukesh Kumar Jha), arising out of Case Crime No. 176 of 2024 under Section
306 I.P.C., Police Station-Khoda, District-Ghaziabad, which is presently
pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Ghaziabad.
Whereafter the applicant has filed an application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. for
discharge, which has been rejected by the trial court vide order dated 3rd July,
2025. Hence the present criminal application has been filed.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent, as
the present first information report implicating the appellant along with other
accused are false and fabricated. The present first information report lodged
by opposite party no.2 is nothing but a bundle of lie and the same has been
lodged only for exploiting the applicant by indulging his name in a fake, false
and frivolous case along with other accused. The entire prosecution story as
unfolded in the first information report is absolutely a self-made story projected
by opposite party no.2.
6. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that from version
as unfolded in the fist information report and the statements of the witnesses
including the parents of the deceased and also from the suicide note of
deceased and WhatsApp chats exchanged between the deceased and
applicant, which were made part of the prosecution material during

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
3
investigation and case diary, nothing incriminating was found against the
accused-applicant to establish prima-facie commission of any offence by him,
when as matter of fact the Investigating Officer on 18th June, 2024, quite
illegally and arbitrarily, concluded the investigation of the case by submitting
charge-sheet No. 1 of 2024 against the accused-applicant for alleged
commission of offence under Section 306 I.P.C. It is relevant to submit that
apart from all the documents which were made part of the case diary, the
Investigating Officer of the case had also appended the print out of WhatsApp
chats of duration between 29.1.2024 up till 29.3.2024 which were allegedly
exchanged between the accused-applicant and and deceased and the said
chats had been given by the informant to the Investigating Officer. The
Investigating Officer of the case had also collected the suicide note left by the
deceased. Both these documents i.e. the print out of the WhatsApp chats and
the suicide note have been included and made part of the case diary, which
were submitted by the informant against the accused-applicant. The
Investigating Officer of the case on 27.4.2024 had gone through the complete
WhatsApp chat as handed over to him by the informant taken out from the
WhatsApp account of deceased and had also analyzed every
messages/conversation held between the deceased and the accused-
applicant beginning from 29.1.2024 up till 29.3.2024. His analysis is part of the
prosecution material appended with the chargesheet supra filed in the instant
case.
7. It is further submitted that from bare perusal of the prosecution evidence
both documentary and oral as appended with the chargesheet supra, it was
more than apparent that not only that there was no incriminating evidence
suggesting even prima-facie commission of any of the offences for which it
was filed against the accused-applicant on the contrary, the evidence was
clearly pointing out the innocence of the accused-applicant. The evidence
collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation clearly
reveals that there was no reference to any act or incident proximate to
commission of suicide by the deceased whereby the accused-applicant could
have been said to be guilty of committing any willful act or omission or
intentionally aiding or instigating the deceased for committing the act of
suicide and therefore, the offence of Section 306 IPC was not made out
against him. Evidently, the Investigating Officer of the case did not find any
evidence, which could have substantiated the wild allegations made by the
informant in the FIR of the instant case regarding physical relationship of the
deceased with the accused-applicant or even regarding demand of dowry, as
alleged between the engagement and the date of suicide of the deceased and
it is for these reason that he had filed charge-sheet for no other offence than
as defined under Section 306 IPC. In fact, the WhatsApp chats including the

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
4
statements given by the parents of the deceased had clearly revealed that the
accused-applicant had met her only two times that too in presence of her
parents and family members. The conclusion drawn by the Investigating
Officer of the case regarding alleged commission of offence under Section 306
IPC qua the accused-applicant is primarily drawn on complete
misinterpretation or to say piecemeal reading of certain messages of complete
WhatsApp chats exchanged between the deceased and the accused-
applicant. By merely reading few messages out of the entire WhatsApp chats
exchanged between 29.1.2024 till 29.3.2024 i.e. to say a day before suicide
on 30.3.2024, the Investigating Officer of the case had jumped to out of
context conclusion that those messages sent by the accused-applicant fell
within the category of abetment of suicide committed by the deceased. A bare
reading of complete WhatsApp chat as collected by the Investigating Officer of
the case goes to reveal that the accused-applicant had always reassured the
deceased that he will marry her under every circumstance on the scheduled
date i.e. 21.4.2024-for which he and his family, had made all preparation
including train ticket reservation for travelling to their village in the State of
Bihar where the marriage ceremony was to be held.
8. It is next submitted that a bare perusal of the WhatsApp chats clearly
reveals that she was obsessed with relationship with the accused-applicant
who used to himself console her on number of previous occasions when she
had shown signs of mental imbalances. In fact, a complete reading of those
chats goes to reveal that she harbored her own feelings while chatting with the
accused-applicant who used to be pestered by extensive messages sent by
her even when he was engaged in his coaching classes. The extremities of
her mental balances are clearly revealed from bare perusal of the entire
WhatsApp chats. Such conversations did not reveal that the accused-
applicant had ever harassed her.
9. It is further submitted that when the trial proceeding of the instant case
reached at the stage of S. 227/228 CrPC, the accused-applicant filed his
discharge application on 17.4.2025 before the Trial Court in terms of Section
227 CrPC. Neither the informant nor the State Counsel had filed their
objection before the trial court in response to written discharge application of
the accused-applicant. However, the trial court quite erroneously vide its
order dated 3.7.2025 has rejected the discharge application of the accused-
applicant without applying its judicial mind to the facts & circumstances of the
case and also over the question of law. Since the order dated 3.7.2025
passed by the trial court, is perverse and illegal and also since no case is
made out against the applicant under Section306 I.P.C. therefore, the entire
criminal proceedings initiated against him, which is clear abuse of process of

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
5
court, are liable to be quahsed by this Court in exercise of extraordinary
powers under Section 528 Cr.P.C. In support of the aforesaid submissions,
learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the following judgments:
(i). Mahendra Awase Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2025 SC OnLine SC 107;
(ii) Nipun Aneja Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 4091;
(iii). Ude Singh Vs. State of Haryana reported in (2019) 17 SCC 301; and
(iv) State of Kerala Vs. S. Unnikrishnan Nair reported in (2015) 9 SCC 639.
10. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by the learned
counsel for the applicant. He submits that a review of the WhatsApp chats
between the applicant and the deceased, spanning from the 21st to the 29th,
clearly reveals that the applicant used to level allegations against the
deceased's character. This caused the deceased significant distress; she
became so troubled by his constant suspicions and accusations that she
ultimately decided to take the extreme step of committing suicide. The
opposition further argues that, although the deceased did not explicitly state in
their suicide note that they were distressed due to the applicant's allegations
regarding their character, the entire set of WhatsApp chats exchanged
between the applicant and the deceased make it abundantly clear that the
deceased died by suicide precisely because of the applicant. In this context,
the opposing side cited the statement of Kavita, a neighbor and friend of the
deceased, who has stated in her statement recorded under Section 161
Cr.P.C. that one day, I went to Jyoti's house for some work and noticed that
she seemed troubled. When I asked her about what was bothering her, she
didn't tell her anything. Later, another day, she found Jyoti sitting outside her
house and asked her again about her troubles; this time, she told her that
Mukesh was harassing her and did not want to marry her. Uncle Jagannath
keeps saying all sorts of unpleasant things to Mukesh about her character. It is
because of what he says that Mukesh also makes disparaging remarks about
her character to her. She is deeply troubled by these things said by the
applicant through her Uncle Jagannath, it makes her wants to die.
On the above premise, learned A.G.A. urges that from the allegations made in
the First Information Report cognizable offence is made out against the
applicant. The defence of the applicant cannot be taken into consideration, at
this stage. Therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence.
11. I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned
A.G.A. and perused the material available on record of the present application

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
6
as well as the entire case diary, which has been produced by the learned
A.G.A. before this Court today.
12. Before coming on the merits of the case, it is necessary for this Court to
refer to Section 306 I.P.C., which reads as follows:
"306. Abetment of suicide.—
If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide,
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
13. The ingredients of Section 306 I.P.C. are defined in Section 107 I.P.C. (45
B.N.S.S.), on the basis of which the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. is
levelled against an accused, therefore, Section 306 with Section 107 which
defines 'Abetment' must be read together. For ready reference Section 107
I.P.C. is quoted here-under:
"107. Abetment of a thing.—
A person abets the doing of a thing, who—
(First)— Instigates any person to do that thing; or
(Secondly— Engages with one or more other person or persons in any
conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place
in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or
(Thirdly)— Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that
thing.
Explanation 1.— A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful
concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily
causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is
said to instigate the doing of that thing.
Explanation 2.— Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of
an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and
thereby facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act."
When Section 306 IPC is read with Section 107 IPC, it is clear that there must
be (i) direct or indirect instigation (ii) in close proximity to the commission of
suicide, along with (iii) clear mens rea to abet the commission of suicide.
14. The term instigation under Section 107 IPC has been explained in the
judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ude Singh & Others Vs. State of

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
7
Haryana reported in (2019) 17 SCC 301 , as follows:
"14.1……20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage
to do "an act". To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not
necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes
instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the
consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be
capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the accused
had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such
circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to
commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word
uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to
actually follow cannot be said to be instigation."
15. In Prakash & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Another reported in
(2026) 6 SCC 251 , the Apex Court has further interpreted the offence as
below:
"18. Section 306 of the IPC has two basic ingredients-first, an act of suicide
by one person and second, the abetment to the said act by another person(s).
In order to sustain a charge under Section 306 IPC, it must necessarily be
proved that the accused person has contributed to the suicide by the
deceased by some direct or indirect act. To prove such contribution or
involvement, one of the three conditions outlined in Section 107 IPC has to be
satisfied.
19. Section 306 read with Section 107 IPC, has been interpreted, time and
again, and its principles are well established. To attract the offence of
abetment to suicide, it is important to establish proof of direct or indirect acts
of instigation or incitement of suicide by the accused, which must be in close
proximity to the commission of suicide by the deceased. Such instigation or
incitement should reveal a clear mens rea to abet the commission of suicide
and should put the victim in such a position that he/she would have no other
option but to commit suicide."
16. Reliance is also to be placed upon another judgment of the Apex Court in
the case of Pawan Kumar Vs. State of H.P. reported in 2017 (7) SCC 780
wherein it has been held as under:
"43. Keeping in view the aforesaid legal position, we are required to address
whether there has been abetment in committing suicide. Be it clearly stated
that mere allegation of harassment without any positive action in proximity to
the time of occurrence on the part of the accused that led a person to commit
suicide, a conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable. A casual

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
8
remark that is likely to cause harassment in ordinary course of things will not
come within the purview of instigation. A mere reprimand or a word in a fit of
anger will not earn the status of abetment. There has to be positive action that
creates a situation for the victim to put an end to life."
17. In Balaji Jaiswal Vs. State of Chattishgarh & Another reported in 2026
SCC OnLine SC 60 2 has opined in paragraph no.11 that from the aforesaid
decision, it becomes clear that for sustaining a charge under Section 306 of
the Penal Code, it has to be shown that the accused persons had contributed
to the suicide by the deceased through some direct or indirect act. Section 107
of the Penal Code has thereafter been referred to hold that there ought to be
some instigation or incitement that would reveal a clear mens rea to abet the
commission of suicide, thus, leading the victim to such a position that he/she
would have no other option but to commit suicide. There ought to be some
material to indicate a positive act of instigation, which is a crucial component
of abetment. Instigation or incitement on the part of the accused person has
been held to be the gravamen of the offence of abetment to suicide. The act of
instigation also has to be in close proximity to the act of suicide so as to form
the nexus or a chain to indicate that the act of suicide was the direct result of
the act of instigation by the accused person. Incidentally, the decision
in Ramesh Kumar (supra) cited by the learned counsel for the first respondent
has been considered and relied upon in Prakash & Others (supra).
18. Now it is necessary for this Court to notice the relevant facts of this Case.
It is admitted by the prosecution as per the version of the first information
report and the statements of the witnesses that the marriage of the deceased
Jyoti Jha, had been fixed with Mukesh Kumar Jha (applicant) for 21st April,
2024. After fixing of the said marriage, the deceased sent a message to the
applicant's WhatsApp number for the first time on January 29, 2024, at 21:51
hours. The applicant responded, and thereafter, the two remained in regular
contact via WhatsApp and phone calls, a pattern of communication that
continued until March 29, 2024, at 23:58, the night before the deceased's
death i.e. 30th March, 2024, as is evident from the WhatsApp chats
exchanged between the applicant and the deceased and the same are part of
the case diary, which have been brought on record from page nos. 144 to 230
of the paper book.
19. Upon perusal of the entire prosecution case, it becomes evident that,
following the investigation, the Investigating Officer concluded, based solely
on the WhatsApp chats between the applicant and the deceased, that the
deceased, feeling distressed and troubled by the remarks made by the
applicant regarding her character, was driven to take the extreme step of
committing suicide. It is on the basis of this evidence that the Investigating

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
9
Officer submitted a charge-sheet against the applicant. Because in the suicide
note written by the deceased before her death, she has nothing stated against
the applicant.
20. From perusal of the entire WhatsApp chats exchanged between the
applicant and the deceased from 29th January, 2024 at 21:51 hrs. to 29th
March, 2024 at 23:58 hrs., it is apparent that there is nothing to prove that the
applicant had ever provoked or instigated the deceased to take extreme steps
of committing suicide. It is also cropped up from the aforesaid chats that the
applicant has not conspired in committing suicide by the deceased along with
other accused. Reading these chats also reveals that the deceased was a
highly sensitive young woman who would get upset with the applicant over
trivial matters. She would constantly message or call him, even late at night,
and would become displeased if he was unable to talk due to work
commitments or exhaustion. Although their marriage had only just been
arranged, she would behave toward the applicant as if she were already his
wife. A close examination of the chats reveals that it was the deceased who
repeatedly pestered the applicant to talk, and even used emotional blackmail
to compel the applicant to engage in conversation.
21. Abetment to commit suicide involves a mental process of instigating a
person or intentionally aiding a person in the doing of a thing. Without a
positive proximate act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in
committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. Besides, in order to
convict a person under Section 306 IPC, there has to be a clear mens rea to
commit the offence.
22. The Apex Court in Amudha Vs. State reported in 2024 (19) SCC 690 has
held that there has to be an act of incitement on the part of the accused
proximate to the date on which the deceased committed suicide. The act
attributed should not only be proximate to the time of suicide but should also
be of such a nature that the deceased was left with no alternative but to take
the drastic step of committing suicide.
23. Again, in the case of Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi Vs. State of
Karnataka reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3541 , the Apex Court observed
that discord and differences in domestic life are quite common in society.
Commission of suicide largely depends upon the mental state of the victim.
Until and unless some guilty intention on the part of the accused is
established, it is ordinarily not possible to convict the accused for an offence
under Section 306 IPC.
24. In Prakash Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2026) 6 SCC 251 , the

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
10
Apex Court after analysing various decisions on the point summed up the
legal position in the following manner:
"14. Section 306 read with Section of IPC, has been interpreted, time and
again, and its principles are well established. To attract the offence of
abetment to suicide, it is important to establish proof of direct or indirect acts
of instigation or incitement of suicide by the accused, which must be in close
proximity to the commission of suicide by the deceased. Such instigation or
incitement should reveal a clear mens rea to abet the commission of suicide
and should put the victim in such a position that he/she would have no other
option but to commit suicide."
25. In the aforesaid judgment, the Apex Court referred to its earlier decision in
Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2002 (5) SCC
371 and held that in a given case, even a time gap of 48 hours between using
of abusive language by the accused and the commission of suicide would not
amount to a proximate act.
(2025) 4
26. In Mahendra Awase Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in
SCC 801 the Apex has observed that as has been held hereinabove, to
satisfy the requirement of instigation the accused by his act or omission or by
a continued course of conduct should have created such circumstances that
the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide. It was
also held that a word uttered in a fit of anger and emotion without intending the
consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.
27. The Apex Court in the case of Ayyub & Others Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh & Another reported in (2025) 3 SCC 334 in paragraph nos. 21 and
22 has observed as under:
"20. By a long line of judgments, this Court has reiterated that in order to make
out an offence under Section 306 IPC, specific abetment as contemplated by
Section 107 IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring about the
suicide of the person concerned as a result of that abetment is required. It has
been further held that the intention of the accused to aid or instigate or to abet
the deceased to commit suicide is a must for attracting Section 306 IPC [See
Madan Mohan Singh vs. State of Gujarat and Another (2010) 8 SCC 628 ].
Further, the alleged harassment meted out should have left the victim with no
other alternative but to put an end to her life and that in cases of abetment of
suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to commit
suicide [See Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu vs. State of West Bengal (2010) 1
SCC 707 and M. Mohan vs. State (2011) 3 SCC 626 and Ramesh Kumar vs.
State of Chhattisgarh (2001) 9 SCC 618].

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
11
21. These principles have been reiterated recently by this Court in Mahendra
Awase vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in (2025) 4 SCC 801."
28. In the case of reported in
Vinod Shivakumar Vs. State of Maharashtra
2026 SCC OnLine SC 1583 the Apex Court has relied upon the judgment of
Apex Court in the case Abhinav Mohan Delkar Vs. State of Maharashtra
reported in (2026) 6 SCC (Cril.) 12 4, wherein Sections 306 and 107 I.P.C.
have been interpreted and it has been observed as under:
"25. …even if there is allegation of constant harassment, continued over a
long period; to bring in the ingredients of Section 306 read with Section 107,
still there has to be a proximate prior act to clearly find that the suicide was the
direct consequence of such continuous harassment, the last proximate
incident having finally driven the subject to the extreme act of taking one's life.
Figuratively, 'the straw that broke the camel's back'; that final event, in a
series, that occasioned a larger, sudden impact resulting in the unpredictable
act of suicide. What drove the victim to that extreme act, often depends on
individual predilections; but whether it is goaded, definitively and
demonstrably, by a particular act of another, is the test to find mens rea.
Merely because the victim was continuously harassed and at one point, he or
she succumbed to the extreme act of taking his life cannot by itself result in
finding a positive instigation constituting abetment. Mens rea cannot be
gleaned merely by what goes on in the mind of the victim.
26. The victim may have felt that there was no alternative or option, but to take
his life, because of what another person did or said; which cannot lead to a
finding of mens rea and resultant abetment on that other person. What
constitutes mens rea is the intention and purpose of the alleged perpetrator as
discernible from the conscious acts or words and the attendant circumstances,
which in all probability could lead to such an end. The real intention of the
accused and whether he intended by his action to at least possibly drive the
victim to suicide, is the sure test. Did the thought of goading the victim to
suicide occur in the mind of the accused or whether it can be inferred from the
facts and circumstances arising in the case, as the true test of mens rea would
depend on the facts of each case. The social status, the community setting,
the relationship between the parties and other myriad factors would distinguish
one case from another.
However harsh or severe the harassment, unless there is a conscious
deliberate intention, mens rea, to drive another person to suicidal death, there
cannot be a finding of abetment under Section 306."
29. Having surveyed the relevant legal provisions and the case laws on the

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
12
subject, let us now deal with the material available on record specifically the
WhatsApp-Chats exchanged between the applicant and the deceased and the
statement of the prosecution witness Kavita.
30. In the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., Kavita, who is stated
to be friend and neighbour of the deceased has not disclosed the date and
time when she visited the house of the deceased and met her and she has not
disclosed as to on which date the deceased has told her that the applicant
was harassing her and did not want to marry her. Since uncle Jagannath
keeps saying all sorts of unpleasant things to Mukesh about her character,
therefore, the applicant makes disparaging remarks about her character to
her. Because of that, she is deeply troubled by these things said by him, it
makes her wants to die. In the said conversation exchanged between the
deceased and the witness Kavita, it is not clear as to from which period,
applicant was harassing the deceased and when he refused to marry the
deceased.
31. From the aforesaid statement, it is not clear as to on which date, the
deceased was deeply troubled by the disparaging remarks about her
character which the applicant had expressed or told to her.
32. Perusal of the entire WhatsApp chats exchanged between the applicant
and the deceased indicates that in their conversation, which took place
between 23:11 from March 23, 2024, to 08:43 on March 24, 2024 which are
at page nos. 225 to 226 of the paper book, the deceased had addressed the
applicant, noting that he had doubts regarding her character. Subsequently, in
her chats with the applicant, she did not state that the applicant had refused
marriage, was harassing her, or had made allegations regarding her
character. When as matter of fact the deceased continued to chat with the
applicant until 23:58 on March 29, 2024, the day before her death. During
these interactions, their communication remained cordial, and there was no
indication that she was distressed or troubled by any aspect of the applicant's
behavior. Viewed in this light, the claim that she committed suicide about six
th
days after the 24 March, 2024, allegedly due to accusations made by the
applicant against her character, seems completely untrue. Because a person
may take the drastic step of ending their own life in a moment of intense
impulse, an impulse often triggered by someone else's provocation or
instigation, while simultaneously feeling that they have no other option but to
commit suicide.
33. For ready reference, the relevant whatsapp chats exchanged between the
applicant and the deceased on 23rd March, 2024 to 24th March, 2024, which
are at page nos. 225 and 226 of the paper book, are quoted herein below:

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
13
"23/03/2024, 23:11 - Jyoti828594: Aj jo baate Hui wo Galt Hui mre charector
ko le k apko doubt hua y maine nhi socha tha kavi v Aisa v hoga apko maine
Nisha wali baat nhi batai uski wajah s apne mre charector p doubt kiya
23/03/2024, 23:13 - Jyoti828594: Mujhe itna pata h ki Maine kavi v life m avi
Tak kch galat nhi Kiya h na kisi ko apne saath krne Diya h aj bahut bade level
p glt samjha gaya mujhe
23/03/2024, 23:15 - Jyoti828594: M sab kch seh sakti hu but charcter k agains
question nhi kvi nhi kuki m janti hu m glt nhi hu maine aj Tak kavi koi galti nhi
Kari h m sab s zyada mre father ki respect krti hu unki kasm h mujhe majne
kch glt nhi Kiya h
22 23/03/2024, 23:15 - Jyoti828594: Maine apko apna husband 1st day s hi
maan liya tha
23/03/2024, 23:16 Jyoti828594: Per agr apko mre charector ko le | percent v
doubt h to fir apko Jo thik Lage ap karna
23/03/2024, 23:16 - Jyoti828594: But m bs itna hi kehna chahti hu ki Maine jis
k liye apne ap ko glt nhi hone Diya usi ne glt samjh liya
23/03/2024, 23:17 - Jyoti828594: Apne bahut kch kaha aj tumhe tumhare
hisaab s ladka chalane wala milna chaiye or v bhut keh Saadi contract hogi
23/03/2024, 23:18 - Jyoti828594: Ye sab Jo apne kaha shi nhi h y apne Jo
prediction kari h sahi h jis base p ap y sab mujhe keh rhe ho
23/03/2024, 23:18 - Jyoti828594: Kuki har galti ki maafi h per is galti ki nhi
23/03/2024, 23:19 - Jyoti828594: Per fir v baate bahut zyada hui
23/03/2024, 23:19 - Jyoti828594: Mujhe ap s hi Saadi krni h mre maan m koi
doubt nhi h
23/03/2024, 23:20 - Jyoti828594: But m ap sy nhi kehti ki ap wo doubt rakh k
mujhe s Saadi kro
23/03/2024, 23:20 - Jyoti828594: Apko number chaiye tha mummy ka
23/03/2024, 23:21 - Jyoti828594: Mom .vcf (file attached)
24/03/2024, 08:24 - Jyoti828594: Mujhe bahut important baat krni h ap s
24/03/2024, 08:24 - Jyoti828594: Plzzzzzzz call recieve kro
24/03/2024, 08:28 - Jyoti828594: M bs ap s itna hi kahugi jo kar rhe ho ap mre
saath wo thik nhi h
24/03/2024, 08:28 Jyoti828594: Agr apko yhi sb Krna tha to fir mujhe apni wife
Ist day hi mana Krna chahiye tha ki nhi ho sakti hai hamari saadi
24/03/2024, 08:29 - Jyoti828594: Kuki itne doubt k saath to hum kaise
rahenge
24/03/2024, 08:29 - Jyoti828594: Maine apko apna sb kch manaa
24/03/2024, 08:30 - Jyoti828594: But ap mre saath y sb karoge manine nhi
socha tha fir v map s yhi kehna chahti hu ki Maine apko apna husband mana
h chahe ap mujhe apna keh v na mano
24/03/2024, 08:30 - Jyoti828594: 1 baar call rec kro

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
14
24/03/2024, 08:32 - Jyoti828594: Ku kar rhe ho ap y sb
24/03/2024, 08:32 - Jyoti828594: M sch m keh rhi hu agr ab ap baat nhi kar
ोगे
to baat thik nhi hogi
24/03/2024, 08:43 - Jyoti828594: Apne mujhe baaki ladkiyo k jaise samjha
kuu sch m manine kvi nhi soch sakti ki mra husband mujhe itna glt samjhega
mujhe samjh nhi aa raha h kim ky kahu ap s ab agr m bs itna hi keh sakti hu
ap s ki agr apne mujhe kvi v keh samjha to yakeen Karo mra maine aj Tak kch
v galt nhi Kiya h Jo baate hamare beech Hui wo sirf isliye kuki maine apko
apna husband mana pure Dil s mummy papa ne kaha tha husband hi sb keh
hota h or isliye sari baate Hui or ab itna aage aane k baad agr chije glt hoti h
to sch m m kvi v apne ap ko kisi or ko husband nhi Maan sakti hu agr ap keh v
kar but apne mujhe apna nhi mana y apne mujhe samjha Diya h mre trust jo
ोगे
aj Tak mummy papa p tha wo v brk hoga kuki m nhi seh sakti hu y sab m
bahut zyada pareshan hu mujhe nhi pata m ky Karu ap mri call rec call lo
Verna mujhe v nhi pata ky karugi m
24/03/2024, 08:46 - Husband Ji: Tension na lo
24/03/2024, 08:46 - Jyoti828594: Iska milh h apko nhi krni h baat achi baat m
bs itna hi kahugi ap s ki bahutt ho gaya h ab m ja rhi hu mummy s baat karne
m unko keh dungi saari baate Jo vh but use pehle'm ap s itna hi kahugi ki Dil s
maine apko apna mana h apne nhi mana h koi nhi
24/03/2024, 08:47 - Husband Ji: Ok"
34. In the present case, it is evident from the aforementioned facts that the
allegation against the applicant, that he harassed the deceased regarding her
character, pertained to a period ending six days prior to her death. An
th
examination of the chats, specifically those from the 28th and 29 March,
2024 reveals no indication that the applicant made any remarks concerning
the deceased's character. Moreover, the marriage between the deceased and
the applicant had only been fixed, it had not yet taken place. Consequently,
she had ample opportunity or the option, to end the relationship if the applicant
decided against marrying her due to concerns about her character; she could
have severed ties with him, married someone else, and moved forward with
her life as she wished. Since the marriage of the deceased has only been
fixed with the applicant and the same has not been solemnized, therefore,
presumption contained in Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act is also not
applicable in the present case.
35. It is also important for this Court to refer the whatsaap chats which have
been exchanged between the applicant and the decased on 28th March and
29th March, 2024 before her death i.e. 30th March, 2024, which read as
follows:
"27/03/2024, 23:06 - Husband Ji : null
27/03/2024, 23:08 - Husband Ji : null
28/03/2024, 00:03 - Husband Ji : null

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
15
28/03/2024, 05:57 - jyoti828594: null
28/03/2024, 11:56 - Husband Ji : null
28/03/2024, 13:05 - Husband Ji : null
28/03/2024, 13:05 - jyoti828594: Bolo
28/03/2024, 13:17 - Husband Ji : null
28/03/2024, 13:17 - jyoti828594: plz ap aaram s raho
28/03/2024, 13:18 - Husband Ji : Suno
28/03/2024, 13:18 - Husband Ji : Tum
28/03/2024, 13:18 - Husband Ji : Jo itna
28/03/2024, 13:18 - Husband Ji : Chodo
28/03/2024, 13:19 - Husband Ji : Kya bolu
28/03/2024, 13:19 - Husband Ji : Tumko
28/03/2024, 13:19 - jyoti828594: Jaisa apko thik lage
28/03/2024, 13:19 - Husband Ji : Ise khte h
28/03/2024, 13:19 - Husband Ji : Arrogance
28/03/2024, 13:20 - jyoti828594: Ok
28/03/2024, 13:20 - Husband Ji : null
28/03/2024, 14:09 - jyoti828594: Khana khaya apne
28/03/2024, 14:22 - Husband Ji : Hn ji
28/03/2024, 14:52 - jyoti828594: Ok
29/03/2024, 11:04 - Husband Ji : null
29/03/2024, 15:17 - Husband Ji : This message was deleted
29/03/2024, 15:17 - Husband Ji : This message was deleted
29/03/2024, 23:58 - Husband Ji : null"
36. From the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the opinion that none of the
ingredients required in law to make out a case under Section 306 IPC to be
even remotely mentioned in the charge-sheet or are being borne out from the
material on record. The utterance attributed to the accused-applicant
assuming it to be true cannot be said to be of such a nature as to leave the
deceased Jyoti with no other alternative but to put an end to her life. It could
certainly not be said that the applicant by his acts created circumstances
which left the deceased with no other option except to commit suicide. Viewed
from the armchair of the applicant, the exchanges with the deceased, albeit
heated, are not with intent to leave the deceased with no other option but to

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
16
commit suicide. This is the conclusion this Court draws taking a realistic
approach, keeping the context and the situation in mind. Under these
circumstances, proceeding with the trial against the applicant in the charge-
sheet as filed will be a gross abuse of process.
37. It is now necessary forthis Court to refer to the hand written suicide note
of deceased Jyoti Jha, which was written in Hindi. For ready reference, the
same is extracted in English hereunder:
"Suicide Note
Mom Dad please forgive me, I cannot live anymore. Brother Nigam, take care
of everything, mistakes that happened from me:
1. I love Mom very much.
2. The world is very wrong.
3. It is given in Ramayana to wait, but now I cannot live.
Mistakes that no one else should make:
1. First mistake: Do not trust anyone except Mom and Dad.
2. Second mistake: Do not think about what people will say.
Papa Mom please forgive me."
Perusal of the suicide note written by the deceased before her death reveals
that nothing wrong has stated by her against the applicant.
38. In Mahendra Awase (Supra) has opined in paragraph no. 24 as under:
"24. The conduct of the proposed accused and the deceased, their
interactions and conversations preceding the unfortunate death of the
deceased should be approached from a practical point of view and not
divorced from day-to-day realities of life. Hyperboles employed in exchanges
should not, without anything more, be glorified as an instigation to commit
suicide. It is time the investigating agencies are sensitised to the law laid down
by this Court under Section 306 so that persons are not subjected to the
abuse of process of a totally untenable prosecution. The trial courts also
should exercise great caution and circumspection and should not adopt a play
it safe syndrome by mechanically framing charges, even if the investigating
agencies in a given case have shown utter disregard for the ingredients of
Section."
39. After deeper scrutiny of the whatsapp chats exchanged between the

NA528 No. 33529 of 2025
17
applicant and deceased and also the statement of witness Kavita relied upon
by the learned A.G.A., this Court finds that the prosecution has failed to prima
faice establish that the accused applicant had any intention to instigate, aid or
abet the deceased to commit suicide. The whatsapp chats and the statement
of Kavita undoubtedly reflects the anguish of the deceased, however, they do
not disclose any act on the part of the applicant from which the requisite mens
rea can reasonably be inferred. There is also no material to suggest that the
accused applicant, by his words or conduct, intended to push the deceased
into such a position that she was left with no reasonable alternative except in
an unfortunate incident. Furthermore, the criminal liability under Section 306
I.P.C. cannot rest upon the tragedy of the outcome alone. It must be founded
upon the statutory ingredients of Section 306, which are absent in the present
case.
40. This Court is therefore, satisfied that even if the entire prosecution material
is accepted at its face value, the ingredients of the offence punishable under
Section 306 IPC are not made out. The continuation of the criminal
proceedings against the applicant would in the facts and circumstances of the
case, amounts to an abuse of process of the law.
41. In view of the above discussions and deliberations of the facts and laws
laid down by the Apex Court referred to above, this Court holds that since
ingredients contained in Section 107 I.P.C. to make out a case under Section
306 I.P.C. are completely missing in the facts of the present case, therefore,
the entire criminal proceedings initiated against the applicant are liable to be
quashed.
42. Consequently, the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 24 of 2025
(State Vs. Mukesh Kumar Jha), arising out of Case Crime No. 176 of 2024
under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station-Khoda, District-Ghaziabad, pending
before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Ghaziabad are
quashed .
43. The present criminal application is allowed.
44. There shall be no order as to costs.
October 27, 2026
Sushil/-
(Madan Pal Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad