Suicide After Breakup Cannot Automatically Be Called Abetment: SC

The Supreme Court has clarified that merely ending a live-in relationship or refusing to marry a partner cannot, by itself, be treated as abetment of suicide if the other person later dies by suicide. The court also held that such circumstances alone cannot be used to initiate criminal proceedings against the partner or their family members.

The ruling came while dealing with a case from Telangana, in which a bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran quashed criminal proceedings against six accused, including the deceased woman’s partner, his parents and his sister.

According to the complaint, the woman and the first accused were childhood acquaintances and had entered into a consensual live-in relationship for around three months. The man had initially agreed to marry her but later allegedly refused to proceed with the marriage following pressure from his family.

The woman subsequently told her sister that she would take her own life if the marriage did not take place the next day. This was followed by a confrontation between the two families at the accused’s residence. Later, the woman locked herself inside a room and died by suicide.

The accused approached the Supreme Court after both the trial court and Telangana High Court refused to quash the proceedings against them. The apex court examined whether the allegations disclosed the necessary ingredients of abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

The bench found no material to establish that the accused had intended to provoke, instigate or encourage the woman to take her own life. It also noted that there was no indication that the accused had acted with prior knowledge that his refusal to marry would inevitably result in her death.

The court observed that people react differently to emotional situations, particularly when relationships break down. A failed relationship or a breakup may cause severe emotional distress, but a suicide following such a situation cannot automatically be attributed to abetment by the former partner.

After considering the allegations in their entirety, the court concluded that the principal allegation was that the man had refused to marry the woman. Such refusal, without evidence of intentional instigation or a deliberate act driving the person towards suicide, does not satisfy the legal requirements for abetment.

The Supreme Court therefore quashed the criminal proceedings against all six accused, including the partner and his family members.