An alleged instruction to die immediately before suicide makes abetment intent a matter for trial.

The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 20986/2025, arising from Crime No. 56/2025, for an alleged offence under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

The complaint was made by the daughter of a woman who had died by suicide. The complaint alleged that the deceased had borrowed money from the petitioner and another person, that they pressured her to repay the loan and hand over a cheque, and that she was told to hang herself when she could not repay.

The petitioner argued that the charge-sheet did not establish the required intention to abet suicide and relied on Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. State of Maharashtra. The respondents opposed quashing, emphasizing that the alleged statement was made shortly before the death and that there were witnesses to the incident.

Whether the charge-sheet materials disclosed a sufficient basis to proceed against the petitioner for abetment of suicide under Section 108 BNS.

Whether the proceedings should be quashed in the exercise of the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC (corresponding to Section 528 BNSS).

Section 108 BNS concerns abetment of suicide. The petition invoked the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, identified in the petition as corresponding to Section 528 BNSS, to seek quashing of the criminal proceedings.

The petitioner relied on Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. State of Maharashtra, (2026) 6 SCC 233, in support of the contention that the charge-sheet must disclose the requisite mens rea; the High Court distinguished that case on the timing of the alleged statement, noting that it had been made ten days before the suicide there, whereas the alleged statement in this case was made shortly before the death.

The Court considered the timing and context of the alleged conduct material at the quashing stage. Unlike the statement considered in Abhinav Mohan Delkar, the alleged direction to the deceased to hang herself was said to have been made just before her death.

The charge-sheet also alleged pressure to repay the loan and that the deceased was put under considerable stress; it further referred to the presence of accused No. 2 where the deceased was found and the petitioner’s alleged presence with him shortly beforehand. Whether the petitioner intended the deceased to commit suicide was, in the Court’s view, a matter for trial rather than determination on the quashing petition.

It clarified that its observations were confined to the merits of the petition and left all contentions open.