Mere refusal to marry not abetment of suicide: Bombay High Court

A man cannot be booked for the offence of abetment of suicide merely because he had refused to marry a woman who later died by suicide, the Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court recently. .Single-judge Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke, therefore, discharged a man booked under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) for abetment of suicide of his ex-girlfriend.The Court emphasized that there was no evidence to indicate that he had provoked the deceased in any manner leading to her tragic decision. "It nowhere reveals that the applicant, at any time, provoked the deceased victim in any manner to kill herself. On the contrary, the evidence shows that after breaking of the relationship, the deceased victim was constantly in contact with the applicant and was communicating with him. Therefore, in such a situation, merely because the applicant refused to marry her, that by itself would not amount to instigate or provoke the deceased victim to commit suicide," the Court said in its judgment of January 15..The case arose after a young woman died by suicide on December 3, 2020 by hanging herself in Maharashtra's Buldhana. The victim had been in a romantic relationship with the accused for nine years. Following her death, her father lodged a complaint alleging that the accused had abetted his daughter's suicide after breaking off their relationship and developing feelings for another girl. The deceased too left behind an exhaustive suicide note detailing their affair and expressing her distress over his decision to not marry her.The man initially approached Sessions Court at Khamgaon for discharge which was rejected after which he moved the High Court.The counsel for the man argued that breaking off a relationship cannot be construed as instigation or provocation for suicide. He pointed out that communication between the two continued even after their breakup. In this regard, he highlighted WhatsApp chats revealing mutual consent in their physical relationship. He further noted that on December 3, 2020 - the day of her death - the victim had apologised to him. Thus, there was no positive act or action was on the part of the accused to abet her to commit suicide..On the other hand, the counsel for the State contended that sufficient material existed suggesting the man created circumstances contributing to the victim's mental distress.He asserted that at this stage of legal proceedings, strong suspicion is enough for framing charges and maintained that psychological factors surrounding their breakup warranted further examination.Justice Joshi Phalke observed that the relationship was indeed consensual between the accused and the victim and there was no promise of marriage. At the most, it can be termed as a case of broken relationship which cannot be considered abetment, she observed. She elaborated that in order to bring home the charge of abetment, it must necessarily be proved that the accused person had contributed to the suicide by some direct or indirect act. The same was absent in the present case, the Court concluded..In this regard, the Court relied on a recent order of the Supreme Court in Prabhu vs. The State wherein it was held that "broken relationships and heart breaks are part of everyday life and that It could not be said that the appellant by breaking up relationship and by advising her to marry in accordance with the advice of her parents, as he himself was doing, had intended to abet the suicide."Hence, it quashed all charges against the accused under Section 306 read with Section 34 of IPC related to the crime registered against him by Shegaon Police Station..Advocate Akshay Sudame appeared for the accused.Additional Public Prosecutor M J Khan represented the State..[Read Judgment]