Mere Refusal To Marry Or Non-Reply To Messages Not Abetment Of Suicide: Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail

The Delhi High Court today granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of abetting the suicide of his former partner, observing that mere refusal to marry or failure to respond to messages does not constitute instigation or abetment under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that a suicide note, by itself, is not sufficient to deny bail in the absence of any clear, proximate act of instigation.The judge underscore that there must be an “active and direct act” coupled with clear mens rea to attract the offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (abetment of suicide).As per the prosecution, the complainant's daughter died by suicide on May 9, 2023, by hanging herself from a ceiling fan. Two suicide notes were recovered from the spot, along with notebooks and her mobile phone. The post-mortem report confirmed death due to asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging, and FSL examination reportedly confirmed that the suicide notes were written by the deceased.The FIR was registered in August 2025 pursuant to an order passed by the Trial Court on an application under Section 156(3) of CrPC filed by the deceased's parents.The suicide notes allegedly stated that the accused had been in a relationship with the deceased for two years, had promised to marry her, established physical relations, and later refused marriage due to family pressure.Granting relief to the accused, Justice Banerjee said that though the case of the prosecution rested upon the contents of the alleged suicide notes of the deceased, there was nothing credible enough for substantiating the same.“It is at the end of the day a singular version of the deceased. The exchange of WhatsApp texts of the deceased with the applicant prior to her committing suicide also do not point anything of untoward nature which is, for the time being, sufficient to deny bail to the applicant,” the Court said. “More so, since the only allegation is that he did not reply to the texts he received. There are thus no active/ clear act of instigation/ abetment having a direct and proximate link to the commission of suicide,” it added. On the allegation of non-cooperation, the Court remarked that merely not giving “desirable answers” during investigation cannot by itself be a ground to deny bail, especially when the extent of non-participation was unclear.“Merely not getting the 'desirable' answers, is itself not a reason to deny bail, moreover, when the level of non-participation is itself unclear. In any event, the prosecution always has the right to take necessary and proper steps in such a case,” the Court said Holding that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court directed that in the event of arrest, he be released on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with one surety of the like amount.Title: UJJWAL v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 230Click here to read order

Mere Refusal To Marry Or Non-Reply To Messages Not Abetment Of Suicide: Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Mere Refusal To Marry Or Non-Reply To Messages Not Abetment Of Suicide: Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers