The Bombay High Court has granted bail to a man accused of abetting his wife's suicide, observing that words spoken in anger during a domestic quarrel, such as “do whatever you want”, do not prima facie amount to instigation to commit suicide. The Court further observed that a husband's inability to spend time with his wife or take her out due to work commitments constitutes marital discord and, by itself, does not amount to cruelty.

Justice Milind N. Jadhav was hearing a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR registered for offences under Sections 108, 85 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The applicant was accused of abetting the suicide of his wife. The couple had married in July 2025 and initially resided with the applicant's parents and other family members. The prosecution alleged that the applicant did not spend sufficient time with his wife, avoided taking her to relatives or outside, and resisted her attempts to get close to him.

The Court noted that the couple had shifted to a separate flat approximately one month before the incident. On the day of the incident, a quarrel allegedly took place after which the wife expressed that she would commit suicide if the applicant did not listen to her. The applicant responded by saying that she could “do whatever she wants” and left the house to visit his brother. The wife subsequently spoke to her maternal uncle about harassment by her in-laws and died by suicide.

The Court observed that the specific instances of harassment in the prosecution statements were attributed to the applicant's mother and sister, from whom the deceased had already separated. Regarding the applicant's alleged response during the quarrel, the Court held that words spoken in anger did not amount to abetment to suicide.

“Words spoken in anger in a domestic quarrel, namely "do whatever you want", followed by the Applicant leaving his house after the quarrel prima facie do not amount to instigation or any intentional mens rea or conspiracy to push the victim to commit the incident in question,” the Court remarked.

The Court explained that abetment of suicide requires a direct and positive act intentionally instigating the victim to commit suicide, proximate to the incident. A mere reaction to a quarrel or words spoken in anger would not satisfy this requirement. The Court found no such positive or overt act attributable to the applicant in the FIR.

On the allegation of cruelty, the Court observed that a spouse not spending sufficient time with the other spouse or not taking them out were, prima facie, allegations of marital discord. It emphasized the absence of force, violence, abuse or any demand for money or articles by the applicant.

“Insofar as the aspect of cruelty alleged against Applicant is concerned, it is seen that a spouse not giving time and not taking the spouse out are prima facie allegations of marital discord and considering the nature of work of the Applicant who is a lecturer it is prima facie understandable that he may not have the time to do so,” the Court noted.

Finding that custodial interrogation was unnecessary, the Court granted bail to the applicant

Case Title: Abhijit Dilip Garad v. State of Maharashtra [Bail Application No. 4141 of 2026]