Section 306 IPC requires proximate positive instigation; vague harassment allegations and legal proceedings are insufficient.

The complainant alleged that a longstanding dispute concerning allotment and construction over a plot at Shivrajgadh led to repeated threats, pressure and harassment by the applicants and their family members.

On 23 May 2015, proceedings were initiated before the police against the complainant and his family, resulting in a chapter case.

During the relevant period, the complainant’s father, Devjibhai Naranbhai, committed suicide at the Panchayat office; the complainant thereafter lodged FIR C.R. No. I-72 of 2015 at Gondal City Police Station for offences under Sections 306 and 114 IPC.

The applicants invoked Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of the FIR and consequential proceedings.

The dispute concerning the plot had also resulted in civil proceedings, including Regular Civil Suit No. 687 of 2006, which was dismissed, and an appeal under Section 242 of the Panchayat Act against cancellation of the allotment.

Although charges had been framed and four witnesses had been examined during the subsistence of interim protection, further trial proceedings were not continued after the issue was brought to the Trial Court’s notice.

Applicant Mohanbhai Rajabhai Makwana and applicant Harjibhai Dosabhai Makwana having died, the applications stood abated qua them.

Section 482 CrPC empowers the High Court to quash criminal proceedings where the allegations and available material, even if accepted, do not disclose the commission of an offence.

Sections 107 and 306 IPC require proof of abetment and a positive act of instigation, intentional aid or active participation; mere harassment or the fact of suicide is insufficient.

Relying on Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1725, the Court held that even continuous harassment must be connected with a proximate prior act that directly contributed to the suicide, and mens rea cannot be inferred merely from the victim’s decision to take his life.

The Court also relied on Shenbagavalli v. Inspector of Police, 2025 Supreme (SC) 753, for the principle that mens rea cannot be presumed merely because conduct was insulting or abusive.

The principles concerning continuation of interim protection and the effect of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. v. CBI, (2024) 6 SCC 307, were considered in relation to the intervening trial proceedings.

The Court found that the FIR and investigation material contained only vague and general allegations of false complaints, pressure and harassment, without identifying any specific act of instigation, active participation or intentional assistance by the applicants, particularly proximate to the suicide.

The applicants’ allotment of the plot had initially been made by the competent authority, and their challenge to its subsequent cancellation was pursued through a statutory appeal; similarly, the complainant’s family had pursued civil remedies, which were ultimately dismissed.

Such resort to legal remedies, or the initiation of a chapter case against family members other than the deceased, could not by itself amount to deliberate harassment accompanied by the mens rea required for abetment.

The alleged suicide occurred at the Panchayat office while the complainant’s family was involved in proceedings arising from the chapter case, but the Court held that this circumstance did not establish any positive, proximate or compelling act by the applicants that drove the deceased to suicide.

Consequently, the essential ingredients of Sections 107 and 306 IPC were absent, warranting exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC despite the advanced stage of the proceedings.

It held that the FIR did not disclose the requisite instigation, intentional aid, active participation, proximity or mens rea necessary to constitute abetment of suicide under Sections 107 and 306 IPC.

The FIR being C.R. No. I-72 of 2015 registered with Gondal City Police Station, together with all consequential proceedings, including Sessions Case No. 17 of 2015 pending before the Sessions Court at Gondal, was quashed and set aside.

The applications were allowed and the Rule was made absolute; the proceedings stood abated qua the deceased applicants.