Abetment of Suicide

In Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. [2025 INSC 990], the Supreme Court held that to sustain a charge under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, there must be a direct and proximate link between the alleged harassment and the act of suicide.

Abetment to suicide cannot be charged on a teacher for mere scolding of a student who consequently committed suicide, and no normal person could have imagined that a scolding, that too based on a complaint by a student, would result in suicide of the student so scolded, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Thangavel v The State, Through Inspector of Police & Another.

Abetment of suicide can be charged against a person only when the alleged harassment should be of such nature that it leaves the victim with no other alternative but to end their life, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Mahendra Awase v The State of Madhya Pradesh [2025 INSC 76], and Ayyub & Others v State of Uttar Pradesh & Another [2025 INSC 168].

A suicide note alone is not sufficient to establish abetment unless it is corroborated by other evidence, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Patel Babubhai Manohardas & Others v State of Gujarat [ 2025 INSC 322].

A person’s simple refusal to marry a lady would not amount to instigation to commit suicide, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Kamaruddin Dastagir v State of Karnataka [2024 INSC 908]. The broken relationships, while emotionally difficult, do not necessarily amount to abetment of suicide unless there is evidence of intent to commit a criminal act.

The ingredients to constitute an offence, the abetment of suicide, under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code ( IPC) () is attracted if the suicide is committed by the deceased due to direct and alarming encouragement or incitement by the accused leaving no option but to commit suicide, reiterates the Supreme Court (SC) in Nipun Aneja And Ors v State of Uttar Pradesh [2024 INSC 767].

A man cannot be held guilty for abetment of suicide of his wife, under Section 306 of the Indian Penal code (IPC) read with Section 113 A of the Indian Evidence Act (IEA), within seven years of marriage, unless there is cogent evidence of harassment or cruelty, the Supreme Court has said in Naresh Kumar v State of Haryana [2024 (1) KLD 427 (SC)].

Minor quarrels between spouses due to differences of opinion or sporadic instances of ill-treatment would not establish an offence of cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), says the High Court of Kerala in Sreekumar s/o Chellappan Chettiyar v State of Kerala [2024 (1) KLT 382] delivered on 4th January 2024.

The SC held that if a student is simply reprimanded by a teacher for an act of indiscipline and bringing the continued act of indiscipline to the notice of the principal of the institution who conveyed the matter to the parents and if the student who is very emotional or sentimental commits suicide, the teacher cannot be held liable for suicide.