Demand For Repayment Of Loan Doesn't Amount To Abetment Of Suicide: MP High Court Reiterates

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed abetment to suicide charge under Section 306 IPC, observing that a person demanding his money back or in lieu keeping the deceased's motorcycle can't be deemed to be an overt act that left the deceased with no option but to commit suicide.The bench of Justice Pushpendra Yadav observed; "it is clear that the offence of abetment by instigation depends upon the intention of the person who abets. A demand for return of money cannot by itself be construed as an act to be done with intention to instigate or provoke the commission of suicide, as a mere demand of money does not ordinarily drive a person to take such an extreme step. On the contrary, if a person commit suicide, the very purpose of seeking refund of money would stand frustrated, since in such an event the money cannot be recovered at all. Therefore, act of the petitioner i.e. demanding the money back or keeping the motorcycle of the deceased with him cannot be said as an overt act in the nature which led the victim/deceased with no option, but to commit suicide". Per the prosecution, on September 13, 2022, around 9 PM, the deceased committed suicide by hanging himself. During probe, the police recorded the statements of five relatives of the deceased and two other persons. The relatives levelled harassment allegations against the petitioner. The relatives contented that the deceased borrowed 1 Lakh from the petitioner, who demanded repayment of the loan amount. On the date of the incident, the deceased allegedly committed suicide because the petitioner kept his motorcycle.The counsel for the petitioner argued that the Trial Court framed charges under Section 306 IPC without considering the essential ingredients for the offence. It was claimed that there was nothing to show abetment on the part of the petitioner to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. The bench noted that Section 107 of IPC, which defines abetment, makes it obligatory for the prosecution to show and establish the elements of instigation. Further, it was noted that for the offence of abetment, the overt act of the accused must be of the nature that led the victim with no option but to commit suicide. The bench observed, "If the facts of the present case are considered, the only allegation against the petitioner that he was demanding the money back from the deceased and he kept the motor cycle with him. Whether such an act can be said as an overt act of the petitioner is in the nature which led the victim/deceased with no option, but to commit suicide". The court noted that even if the story of the prosecution is believed, there was no material to show that there was an element of instigation on behalf of the petitioner to compel the deceased to take some drastic action. Thus, the bench allowed the revision petition and set aside the impugned order framing charges under Section 306 of the IPC. Case Title: Rinku Lodha v State of Madhya Pradesh [CRR-13-2023]Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 39Click here to read/download the Order

Demand For Repayment Of Loan Doesn't Amount To Abetment Of Suicide: MP High Court Reiterates

Jayanti Pahwa

Tags