+91 964 334 1948
02 Nov 2025, 07:49 AM
The Supreme Court has held that mere refusal to marry, even if true, by itself would not amount to “instigation” as contemplated under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, while quashing an FIR registered against a man accused of abetting the suicide of a woman who allegedly took her life after he backed out of their proposed marriage.
A Bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan was hearing an appeal filed by Yadwinder Singh @ Sunny challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court's refusal to quash an FIR registered against him under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
The FIR was lodged in 2016 by the deceased woman's mother, who alleged that her daughter, a government advocate, consumed poison and died after the appellant reneged on his promise to marry her. The prosecution case was that Singh had “betrayed” the deceased after having assured her that he would make his family agree to the marriage.
However, the Supreme Court found that even accepting the prosecution's version in its entirety, none of the ingredients of “abetment” of suicide under Section 306 read with Section 107 IPC were made out.
Quoting its previous rulings in Nipun Aneja v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan, the Bench reiterated that abetment involves a mental process of instigating or intentionally aiding a person to commit suicide.
"Thus, the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 306 of the IPC would stand fulfilled if the suicide is committed by the deceased due to direct and alarming encouragement/incitement by the accused leaving no option but to commit suicide. The act of instigation as alleged must be with the intention to push the deceased into such a situation that she is left with no other option but to commit suicide Without a positive act of incitement or active aid, the offence cannot be sustained."
“Mere refusal to marry even if true by itself would not amount to instigation as explained under Section 107 of the IPC,” the Court underscored.
The Bench observed that while the deceased may have felt hurt or disappointed by the appellant's conduct, the evidence did not show any direct or active instigation leading her to take the extreme step. The appellant's refusal to marry, even if it caused emotional distress, could not be equated with an intention to drive the woman to suicide.
“It is very sad to note that a young girl took the extreme step of ending her life. It is possible that she might have felt hurt. One sensitive moment took away the life of a young girl. However, as judges, we are obliged to decide the matter on the basis of the evidence on record,” the Court observed.
Holding that putting the accused to trial would be “nothing short of a travesty of justice,” the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashing FIR No. 273 of 2016 registered at Chheharta Police Station, Amritsar, as well as the pending proceedings before the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar.
Case : YADWINDER SINGH @SUNNY v. STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.
Citation : 2025 LiveLAw (SC) 1058
Click here to read the judgment