The Supreme Court has quashed an abetment to suicide case filed under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against a man’s in-laws, ruling that mere use of insulting language, including calling the deceased “impotent,” does not establish abetment of suicide.
The case occurred when a man took his own life, leaving a suicide note accusing his in-laws of harassing him. In the note, they were accused of using offensive language, which involved calling him impotent, while returning their daughter (deceased wife) to her parents’ home after a domestic misunderstanding. Based on the note, an FIR was filed, and the Madras High Court later declined to quash it.
However, the accused appealed to the Supreme Court, which overruled the High Court’s decision. A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and A.G. Masih found that the suicide note lacked any indication of direct instigation or persistent cruelty from the in-laws that could justify charges of abetment.
The Court emphasized that abetment under Section 306 IPC requires clear evidence of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid to commit suicide, as outlined in Section 107 IPC. It noted that the alleged remarks were made almost a month prior to the suicide and that there was no contact between the accused and the deceased during that period.
“Abetment requires a mental process of instigating or aiding suicide. Without a positive act showing such intent, the offence is not made out,” the bench said. Relying on the precedent set in M. Arjunan v. State, the Court reiterated that abusive or insulting words alone do not constitute abetment unless they are accompanied by an intention to provoke suicide.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed the criminal proceedings against the in-laws.
