Broken relationships don't automatically amount to abetment of suicide: Supreme Court

The observations came from a bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Ujjal Bhuyan in a judgement, which overturned the conviction of one Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi by the Karnataka High Court for the offences of cheating and abetment of suicide under the IPC.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday set free a man in a case of suicide of a girl from other religion after he declined to marry her, holding that refusal to marry or broken relationship cannot amount to an act of instigating, inciting or provoking the deceased to end life.

"We find that the accused-appellant had simply refused to marry the deceased and thus, even assuming there was love between the parties, it is only a case of broken relationship which by itself would not amount to abetment to suicide," a bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Ujjal Bhuyan said.

The court set aside the Karnataka High Court's December 15, 2011 which held appellant Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi guilty in the case of abetment of suicide of the 21-year-old girl. 

The bench said there is no direct evidence adduced by the prosecution to prove that the accused-appellant has in any way instigated or provoked the deceased to commit suicide.

"Even assuming, though there is no evidence that the accused-appellant promised to marry the deceased, that there was such a promise, it is again a simple case of a broken relationship for which there is a different cause of action, but not prosecution or conviction for an offence under Section 306, specially in the facts and circumstances," the bench said.

It pointed out abetment involved a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a particular thing and without the positive act on part of the accused there would be no instigation. 

There has to be a clear mens rea on the part of the accused to abet such a crime and it requires an active act or a direct act leading to the commission of suicide, it said.

"Even in cases where the victim commits suicide, which may be as a result of cruelty meted out to her, discord and differences in domestic life are quite common in society and that the commission of such an offence largely depends upon the mental state of the victim. Surely, until and unless some guilty intention on the part of the accused is established, it is ordinarily not possible to convict him for an offence under Section 306 IPC," the bench said.

In the case, the Belgavi court had in 2010 acquitted the accused after trying him for offences of rape, cheating and abetment of suicide. But upon appeal, the High Court reversed the order.

Examining the appeal by the accused, the bench said, "There is no evidence to even establish that the accused-appellant entered into any physical relationship with the deceased on the pretext of marrying her. So, the evidence fails to prove any physical relationship between the two, promise to marry on the part of the accused-appellant and that he was instrumental in instigating the deceased to consume poison or to commit suicide."

The prosecution claimed the deceased came to Kakati in the evening of August 18, 2007 and when the accused-appellant clearly refused to marry her. The deceased spent the whole night at the bus stand at Kakati and in the morning consumed poison, leading to her death at the hospital.

The court noted the dying declaration indicated that it was the deceased who was in love with the accused-appellant and wanted to marry him. 

When the accused-appellant had left the village, it was the deceased who made search about him and came to know that he was residing in Kakati. She herself traced him out at Kakati and went after him. She called him and when they met, he refused to marry her and thus, as her sentiments were hurt, she consumed poison leading to her death, the court noted.

Therefore, in such a situation simply because the accused-appellant refused to marry her, would not be a case of instigating, inciting or provoking the deceased to commit suicide, the bench said.

Referring to Prabhu Vs State represented by Inspector of Police & Anr (2024), the bench pointed out this court observed that broken relationships and heart breaks are part of everyday life and that breaking-up of the relationship would not constitute any instigation or abetment of suicide. In order to constitute ‘instigation’, it must be shown that the accused had by his acts and omissions or by continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide, it said.