Positive Action Of Accused Needed Around Time Of Suicide: P&H High Court Grants Bail To Woman Accused Of Abetting Husband's Suicide

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to a woman accused of abetting her husband's suicide, observing that the accused must have done some positive act at the time proximate to the occurrence of event.

Justice Manisha Batra explained, "in order to bring a case within the provisions of Section 108 of BNS, undoubtedly, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by act of instigation and doing certain acts to facilitate the commission of suicide. The prosecution must show a proof of direct or indirect act of incitement by the accused in commission of suicide."

Allegation of harassment of the deceased by the accused does not suffice. In the absence of any positive action on the part of the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to suicide, offence under Section 108 of BNS would not be considered to have been committed, the Court added.

The FIR was lodged on the statement of Namberdar Ranjit Singh, who alleged that his cousin Kartar Singh was married to the petitioner, Satnam Kaur. It was alleged that due to matrimonial discord, quarrels frequently took place between the couple and the deceased remained mentally disturbed.

On June 21, 2025, the petitioner and her sister were alleged to have abused and assaulted the deceased, following which he left home and did not return. A missing report was lodged, and on June 25, 2025, his body was found in a canal near village Dhund. The complainant alleged that the petitioner, in connivance with co-accused, had abetted the suicide.

The petitioner was arrested on June 25, 2025, and remained in custody for about seven months. Investigation qua her stood completed.

While considering the bail plea, the Court examined the scope of Section 108 BNS (corresponding to Section 306 IPC) and the concept of abetment as defined under Section 45 BNS (Section 107 IPC). 

The Court observed that to attract the offence of abetment of suicide, there must be proof of a direct or indirect act of instigation or intentional aid, the accused must have played an active role in facilitating the commission of suicide, there must be material to show mens rea — a guilty mind and intention to drive the victim to suicide and some positive act proximate to the time of occurrence.

It emphasised that allegation of harassment of the deceased by the accused does not suffice. In the absence of any positive action on the part of the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to suicide, offence under Section 108 of BNS would not be considered to have been committed.

Relying on Aranb Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra (2020 SCC OnLine SC 964), the Court reiterated that specific abetment with intention to bring about the suicide is a sine qua non for the offence.

At the stage of bail, the Court found that the element of direct abetment and mens rea did not prima facie emerge from the record. The allegations were not to the effect that the petitioner had instigated or intentionally compelled the deceased to commit suicide or that he was left with no option but to take the extreme step.

Noting that the petitioner had clean antecedents, that co-accused had been granted anticipatory bail, and that the trial would take considerable time to conclude, the Court allowed the plea.

Mr. Gurmohan Preet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Shivam Joshi, Advocate for the complainant.

Title: Satnam Kaur v. State of Punjab

Click here to read order