Suicide after breakup cannot always be termed abetment: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has held that a refusal to marry, even if followed by suicide, cannot by itself be treated as abetment of suicide, and quashed criminal proceedings against six persons accused in such a case from Telangana.

The case arose from the suicide of a woman who had been living with her alleged lover (the first appellant) for about three months in a consensual relationship. Her siblings alleged that the man later refused to marry her, following which she took the extreme step. An FIR was registered on the basis of a statement by the deceased’s sister, who also claimed that the appellant’s friend had spoken ill of the woman, while his parents and sister opposed the relationship; further, the sister’s own prospective groom had reportedly refused to marry her if the appellant married the deceased, creating additional pressure.

A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran set aside proceedings pending before a magistrate in Medchal-Malkajgiri district, observing that there was no material to show that the accused had instigated the woman to commit suicide. “We are unable to find any instigation by the accused/appellants to drive the deceased to death by suicide. It was neither intended nor can it be said to be abetment,” the court said.

The bench noted that even if the informant’s allegations were accepted in full, they at best established a refusal to marry followed by suicide, but not the necessary intention or knowledge required for abetment. “The refusal to marry was not with an intention to drive the woman to death by suicide, nor can knowledge be attributed to the accused that on such refusal, she would commit suicide,” the judgment said.

Stressing that people respond differently to difficult situations, the court said a breakup ending in suicide cannot automatically be characterised as abetment. “People react differently to situations, and if a breakup ends up with suicide, it cannot always be termed an abetment to suicide,” the bench observed.

The judges also questioned why the deceased had been taken away from the appellant’s house when the relationship was consensual and had reportedly been accepted by his family. They further noted that when the woman later informed her eldest sister of her intention to end her life, no steps were taken to avert the threatened suicide.

Calling the allegations “frivolous”, the bench quashed the proceedings in Sessions Case No. 101 of 2024. It directed that if any of the accused were in custody, they be released immediately unless required in another case, and ordered that bail bonds stand cancelled for those already on bail.

(Inputs from IANS)