Demanding Repayment Of Loan Amount Not 'Intentional Aid' For Abetment Of Suicide: Madras High Court

Granting bail to a man, Justice S Karthikeyan noted that there was no material to show that the man intended the death of the deceased or instigated him. The court noted that the man had lent money to the deceased and demanded its repayment within a week. Following the demand, the deceased consumed poison and committed suicide. The court noted that it could not be said that the petitioner instigated him.

“It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant herein had lent some money to the deceased and demanded the said money within a week and intimidated him. Therefore, the deceased consumed poison and committed suicide. The demand for money, which was already advanced as a loan, does not amount to either instigation or intentional aid for the purpose of abetment of suicide. There is no positive material produced before the Court to show that the appellant intended the death of the deceased and instigated him,” the court said.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Sathiyaraj against an order of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur denying him bail.

It was submitted that Sathiyaraj and the deceased were partners in a lath business. The deceased had borrowed Rs 4,00,000 from Sathiyaraj, which remained unpaid. Sathiyaraj, along with two others, went to the deceased's house and intimidated him by saying that if the money was not paid within a week, they would murder him.

On the same day, the deceased consumed poison and died. Based on a complaint given by the wife of the deceased, a case was registered for offences under Sections 108, 351(2) of the BNS, Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act read with Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Sathiyaraj argued that the present case was foisted to avoid payment of the loan. He submitted that the investigation was complete and that he had been incarcerated since May 2026.

The prosecution, on the other hand, argued that Sathiyaraj had threatened the deceased in a filthy language by referring to his caste name and threatened him that if he did not repay they would murder him. It was argued that the deceased had committed suicide due to this and thus strongly objected to grant of bail.

The court, however, noted that there was no material to show that Sathiyaraj had instigated the deceased to commit suicide. The court also noted that the investigation in the case was over and the final report had also been filed.

Thus, the court was inclined to set aside the order of the trial court and release Sathiyaraj on bail with some conditions.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. K. Arunraj

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. G. Ganeshkumar Government Advocate

Case Title: Sathiyaraj v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 415

Case No: Crl A (MD) No 906 of 2026