Supreme Court holds abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC requires proximate instigation, clear mens rea and definite material.
Case Name: Balaji Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh and Another
Citation: 2026 INSC 375
Date of Judgment/Order: 16 April 2026
Bench: Justice K.V. Viswanathan and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
Held: The Supreme Court held that a charge under Section 306 IPC cannot be sustained merely on general allegations of an illicit relationship between the accused and the deceased’s wife, unless there is specific material showing instigation, incitement, intentional aid, or a proximate act which drove the deceased to commit suicide. The Court reiterated that abetment of suicide requires clear mens rea and a positive act, direct or indirect, which leaves the deceased with no other option but to commit suicide. Suspicion, hearsay allegations, social humiliation, or strained domestic circumstances, without a close causal nexus between the accused’s conduct and the suicide, are insufficient to compel an accused to face trial under Section 306 IPC.
Summary: The case arose from the death of Komal Sahu, who was found hanging from a Babool tree in Chhattisgarh. The final report stated that there was no evidence of murder and that the death was a case of suicide by hanging. The prosecution alleged that the appellant, Balaji Jaiswal, had an illicit relationship with the deceased’s wife, Revati Bai, and that the deceased was humiliated on account of such relationship, leaving him with no option but to commit suicide. On this basis, the Trial Court framed charge under Section 306 IPC, alternatively Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC, and the Chhattisgarh High Court refused to interfere. The Supreme Court examined the statements forming part of the chargesheet and found that the material only indicated that the deceased was addicted to liquor, that the appellant and deceased had consumed liquor together, and that there were general allegations or suspicions of an illicit relationship. The Court held that there was no suicide note, no specific allegation of instigation, no act of intentional aid, and no proximate conduct attributable to the appellant which could satisfy the ingredients of Section 107 IPC read with Section 306 IPC.
Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the criminal appeal, set aside the order dated 8 April 2025 passed by the Chhattisgarh High Court in CRR No. 450 of 2025, and quashed the charge framed against the appellant in Sessions Case No. 80 of 2024 by the Sessions Judge, Kabirdham. The appellant was discharged from the criminal proceedings. The Court clarified that its adjudication was restricted only to the appellant, who was accused No. 1, and that the trial against accused No. 2 would proceed uninfluenced by any observations made in the judgment. All pending applications were disposed of.