Abetment of suicide requires positive instigation and proximate nexus; mere illicit relationships or insults are insufficient.

The deceased, Komal Sahu, died by suicide on May 7, 2024

The Special Investigation Team (SIT) filed a final report stating that while there was no evidence of murder, the deceased had been humiliated by his wife (Revati Bai) in the presence of the appellant

It was alleged that the appellant and Revati Bai were in an illicit relationship, which left the deceased with no choice but to commit suicide

On December 16, 2024, the Trial Court framed charges under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

The appellant challenged this order via a revision application under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which the Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed on April 8, 2025, holding that prima facie ingredients of the offence were satisfied

1. Whether the material on record, taken at face value, satisfies the essential ingredients of "abetment" under Section 306 of the IPC

2. Whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant amounted to an abuse of the process of law warranting quashing

Section 306 of the IPC regarding abetment of suicide, interpreted alongside the definition of "abetment" in Section 107 of the IPC, which requires instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid

R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, establishing that proceedings may be quashed if allegations, even if accepted in their entirety, do not constitute the alleged offence

Principles from Prakash v. State of Maharashtra (2024 INSC 1020) and Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, which mandate that abetment requires a positive act of instigation or incitement with a clear mens rea, occurring in close proximity to the act of suicide

Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat, emphasizing that courts must be extremely cautious in Section 306 cases as the victim is unavailable for cross-examination

The Court examined the charge sheet and found that while there were allegations of an illicit relationship and that the deceased was an alcoholic who felt humiliated, there was no evidence of a "positive act" of instigation by the appellant

Although the appellant and deceased consumed liquor together on May 5, 2024, the suicide occurred on May 7, 2024, showing an absence of the required proximity to establish a nexus between the appellant’s conduct and the death

The Court reasoned that mens rea cannot be presumed; the prosecution must demonstrate that the accused intended to provoke or contribute to the suicide

Mere harassment or an illicit affair, without evidence that the accused goaded the deceased or left him with no other option, does not satisfy the requirements of Section 107 of the IPC

Consequently, the Court found the material to be inferential rather than definite, rendering the trial a futile exercise

The Court held that the ingredients of Section 306 IPC were not satisfied even if the prosecution's material was accepted at face value

The charges framed against the appellant in Sessions Case No. 80 of 2024 were quashed, and the appellant was discharged

The Court clarified that the trial against the co-accused (the wife) shall proceed independently and uninfluenced by these observations