Gujarat High Court
Jadav Jayantibhai Narottamdas vs The State Of Gujarat on 11 November, 2025
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2272 of 2006
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
==========================================================
JADAV JAYANTIBHAI NAROTTAMDAS & ORS.
Versus
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ZUBIN F BHARDA(159) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR ROHAN H.RAVAL APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 11/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appellants are accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 of the Sessions trial conducted by the Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Fast Track Judge, Mahesana, whereby on 30.11.2006 in Sessions Case No.91/2006. The appellants came to be convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'I.P.C.'). The trial was conducted against five of the accused under Sections 498A, 306 and Page 1 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined 114 of the I.P.C., while the charge framed below Exh.5 also included Section 511 of I.P.C. The appellants were sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stipulation of undergoing six months simple imprisonment.
2. As per the complaint Exh.36, which was given by deceased - Laxmiben wife of Arunbhai Somabhai Vankar, all the accused, who were residing near her house earlier had mentally and physically harassed her and being poor she had not retorted to them. The mental and physical harassment continued, which she went on bearing. On 23.03.2006, at about 2:00 in the afternoon, when deceased was all alone at home, it was alleged that Jadav Gunvantiben Jayantibhai and her three sons passed by her house speaking unpalatable things, inspite of that she had not replied. 2.1 Deceased has further stated in the complaint Page 2 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined that since those people were often harassing her mentally and physically and since she could not bear the harassment, she had gone in the toilet of her house, and by pouring kerosene had ignited herself, and when she started shouting her daughter Hinaben and the neighbours came there, even her husband had come to that place, who took her to Visnagar Government Hospital and for further treatment, she was taken to Mahesana Government Hospital. It is stated that she was severally burned over whole of her body. 2.2 The complaint of the deceased further notes that she was completely in her senses. The complaint records that Jadav Jayantibhai Narottambhai, Gunvantiben Jayantibhai, Jadav Khodidas Jayantibhai as well as Mehulbhai Jayantibhai and Ketanbhai Jayantibhai, all residents of Sudiyawada are her family relatives, who told her that she was a quarrelsome person of the family and was spoiling the family. Such Page 3 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined threats were given to her, which she could not bear therefore, on her own had poured kerosene and attempted suicide. She stated that none had burned her and that she had burnt on her own.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Zubin F.Bharda for the respondents - accused referring to the impugned judgment submitted that the accused have been acquitted under Section 498A of the I.P.C. since the Trial Court had not found them related to deceased. Advocate Mr. Bharda stated that the evidence shows that they are not the near relatives, nor even any distant relation could be proved. Mr. Bharda stated that Section 498A I.P.C. was invoked by the police and since it was recorded in the complaint that they were distant relatives, however the same could not been proved and therefore, learned Trial Court Judge deemed fit to acquit all the accused under Section 498A I.P.C.
Page 4 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined 3.1 Learned advocate Mr. Bharda further stated that the provision of Section 511 I.P.C. came to be dropped, which as per the record, it was Investigating Officer, who in his deposition has stated to have dropped the section. 3.2 Referring to the complaint recorded by (P.W.9) Investigating Officer - Pravinpuri Shankerpuri Goswami, statement of deceased recorded by (P.W.8) Head Constable - Harshadkumar Gnabhai and the dying declaration recorded by (P.W.5) Executive Magistrate - Rekhaben Surendrabhai, learned advocate Mr. Bharda would submit that all the records are not consistent. The dying declaration refers to only accused Jayantibhai Talati, where deceased had thrice in her statement stated that she had taken the final step to commit suicide because only of the mental harassment of Jayanti Talati.
3.3 Learned advocate Mr. Bharda stated that Page 5 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined deceased has referred to wife of Jayanti Talati Gunvantiben and three sons named Pinto, Mehul and Khodiya on the ground that she was subjected to mental harassment through them and therefore, she has smashed her forehead and caused self injury and thereafter had poured kerosene to burn herself.
3.4 Learned advocate Mr. Bharda submitted that deceased had very specifically excludes her husband and parents-in-law stating that they were not at fault and that only because of harassment of Jayanti Talati she has burned herself. The statement recorded by P.W.8 - Head Constable would suggest that accused Jayanti Narottam, his wife Gunvantiben, sons - Khodidas, Mehul and Ketan, referring to all as four of them, were giving her mental stress and always were creating dispute by calling her on phone. Her husband from morning to evening remains out for business. On that day at about 2 O' Clock in the afternoon all Page 6 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined four had mentally harassed her and therefore, she had burned herself by pouring kerosene. 3.5 Advocate Mr. Bharda contended that the trial was against five persons while the statement refers to four, where the names of all five are mentioned in the statement. Mr. Bharda stated that it does not become clear as to who were four out of five mentally harassing deceased. The statement Exh.43, as submitted by learned advocate Mr. Bharda, was immediate on point of time, as according to the witness Head Constable, he had received the 'Wardhi' from Visnagar Civil Hospital informing that Laxmiben Vankar got burned excessively and therefore, on such 'wardhi' he had gone to record the statement. Mr. Bharda submitted that statement (Exh.43) does not bear endorsement of the Doctor, and Head Constable also did not deem it fit to record the statement with the endorsement of the Doctor. It is contended by learned advocate Mr. Bharda that Page 7 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined the statement Exh.43 has to be considered as the F.I.R., and the complaint produced by the husband of deceased as Exh.36, would become a statement of deceased to the I.O.
3.6 It is also contended by learned advocate Mr. Bharda that deposition of the treating Doctor as well as the cross-examination of the Executive Magistrate would prove that deceased was not mentally and physically fit to give any dying declaration and her thumb impressions were forcibly taken on the dying declaration. Mr. Bharda further stated that deceased could not read the dying declaration, as she was burned on the eyes, which becomes clear from deposition of the Executive Magistrate and thus, stated that no reliance can be placed on the statements of deceased.
3.7 Learned advocate Mr. Bharda further stated that the husband was continuously with the injured wife and the statements, as recorded Page 8 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined appears to be tutored. Mr. Bharda stated that family were not staying in the exact neighbourhood. The evidence of the husband would bring the fact on record that accused No.1 was a Talati and that the dispute had arisen between the younger brother of the husband P.W.6 and the accused No.1 - Jayantibhai Narottambhai with regard to a plot, where as a Talati accused No.1 had raised an objection in the Panchayat to the transfer, and further some incident has also been referred of 17.05.1993, where it has been alleged that the members of accused family were not invited in the marriage occasion of younger brother - Yogesh.
3.8 Referring to the provisions of law and the ingredients provided under Section 306, learned advocate Mr. Bharda relying on the judgments of
(i) Ram Pyarey Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [2025 (6) SCC 820], (ii) Abhinav Mohan Delkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. [2025 SCC OnLine SC Page 9 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined 1725], (iii) Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanai Vs. State of Karnataka Through SHO Kakati Police [ 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3541], (iv) Ashwinbhai Premjibhai Vispara and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat [2025 SCC OnLine Guj. 2871] and Lavjibhai Sukhabhai Gohil Vs. State of Gujarat [2025 (0) AIJEL-HC 251255], submitted that mens rea and constant goading with no option to deceased, but to commit suicide has to be proved.
3.9 Learned advocate Mr. Bharda submitted that the proximity to the incident, as alleged could not be proved in view of the evidence of the Investigating Officer since the date and time of the alleged incident of wife of, accused No.1 i.e. accused No.2 and the children i.e. rest of the accused, having allegedly rebuked deceased does not get proved, since the children as the accused were proved to be writing examination, and even accused No.1 Jayantibhai was at his place of work. Mr. Bharda further stated that the Page 10 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined prosecution is required to prove the connection with the incident to consider it as an abetment for the commission of offence, where the prosecution is required to prove the instigation to the extent of goading the deceased with no other alternative, but to commit suicide. 3.10 Advocate Mr. Bharda further stated that there is bald allegation in omnibus form of mental and physical harassment, while how and in what way deceased was mentally and physically harassed by the accused could not be proved, and in absence of any cogent evidence with regard to harassment or abetment in any form of aiding or instigating, Mr. Bharda submitted that no conviction can lie under Section 306 of I.P.C.
4. Countering the arguments, learned APP Mr. Rohan H.Raval referring to the evidence of P.W.1
- Doctor Gautambhai Vrajlal Naiak, who had conducted the postmortem along with Doctor S.K. Vaishnav, submitted that deceased was 80% burned Page 11 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined from second to third degree and the injury was also found on the head. Mr. Raval submitted that the extent and description of the injury have been recorded in the deposition of P.W.1, who has relied upon the postmortem report Exh.16. The panch P.W.2 has proved the place of incident. The Panchnama-Exh.19 shows that it was the washroom at the house, where from the plastic bucket as well as match stick were recorded to be found. 4.1 Learned APP stated that P.W.3 - Viraji Manaji Thakor has referred to the articles, which were recovered from the place of incident, apart from the plastic bucket and the match stick, the cotton swabs to record the black carbon burns on the area as well as the blood stain was recovered.
4.2 Learned APP Mr. Raval referring to the deposition of P.W.4 - Doctor Mansungbhai Laljibhai Chaudhary, submitted that on 23.03.2006 at about 4:00 in the evening, the injured was Page 12 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined brought for the treatment without any police Yadi. The doctor had informed the P.S.O. of Visnagar. Placing reliance on the deposition of P.W.4, learned APP submitted that the names of all the accused were disclosed by this treating Doctor, which itself proves the fact of immediate cause of commission of suicide, where the act of accused was in the form of continuous nature. The deceased was continuously mentally harassed by accused and therefore, deceased burned herself. Learned APP submitted that according to the Doctor, it was 90 to 95% burns on the body. 4.3 Learned APP further submitted that it was not a single incident of harassment, as the statement recorded by Head Constable proves that deceased was harassed continuously at the hands of accused and thus, submitted that the statement before the husband, Head Constable (P.W.8), Doctor, Executive Magistrate and Investigating Officer as Dying Declaration consistently proves Page 13 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined the harassment of all the five.
5. Heard learned advocates of both the sides, perused the record. The Investigating Officer (P.W.9) - Pravinpuri Shankerpuri Goswami in his deposition stated that on 23.03.2006, when he was at his police station he received the statement of Laxmiben Arunbhai Somabhai from Visnagar and after making the information entry, the P.S.O. handed over the investigation to him and thereafter, he recorded the statement of Laxmiben and on registration of complaint as C.R. No.23/06 under Sections 498A, 306, 511 and 114 of I.P.C., the further investigation was carried by him. He visited the place of incident for drawing the Panchnama, and thereafter in presence of F.S.L. Officer, the muddamal were seized. The statements of the witnesses were recorded, and since the complainant lady died during the treatment, further statements of the witnesses were recorded. The muddamal was sent for F.S.L. Page 14 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined examination and after receiving the dying declaration from the Executive Magistrate placing along the inquest Panchnama, P.M. Note and the F.S.L. report, he filed the charge-sheet. 5.1 In the cross-examination, the Investigating Officer affirmed that he had recorded the complaint Exh.36 of Laxmiben. The Information Entry No.7/06 was registered by P.S.O. The depute order he placed on record at Exh.45. The Investigating Officer in his deposition-in-chief stated that he had produced report Exh.16 for deletion of Section 511 I.P.C. in the matter. 5.2 From the cross-examination of the Investigating Officer, it could be brought that accused were not related to the complainant. I.O. had not procured any pedigree to show the relationship of accused with deceased and had also affirmed that deceased was not staying along with the accused. The Investigating Officer could also affirm that accused No.3 - Khodidas, accused Page 15 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined No.4 - Mehulbhai and accused No.5 - Ketanbhai, all the three were studying and when he had gone for arresting accused - Khodidas Jayantibhai, it has been recorded in the statement that, he had gone to give his English paper at the college and in the same way, Ketanbhai had also given such facts in the statement.
5.3 From the cross-examination it could also become clear that there was no transaction regarding money, nor there was any issue of dowry. The Investigating Officer clarified that during the investigation it came to his knowledge that on 23.03.2006, accused Gunvantiben and her three sons had passed near the house of deceased and had spoken unpalatable words, and the Investigating Officer also stated that during his investigation he had recorded statement of the neighbours - Kiranbhai Kanahiyabhai and Somabhai Punjabhai. The record suggests that none of these persons have been examined during the trial. The Page 16 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined Investigating Officer could say that in the statement of both these witnesses, they had got it recorded that there were often quarrels between the complainant and the accused. However, this fact could not be corroborated in absence of examination of Kiranbhai Kanahiyabhai and Somabhai Punjabhai. The family was having quarrel, but it appears that the same was because accused No.1, who was a Talati, which fact gets disclosed in the cross-examination of the husband of the deceased P.W.5 - Jadav Arunbhai Somabhai, where he had stated that his younger brother Yogesh wanted to purchase a plot and accused No.1
- Jayantibhai Narottambhai had raised a dispute before the Panchayat. The dispute raised was by accused No.1 in his official capacity. 5.4 The incident of 17.05.1993 would have no direct bearing to the act of deceased committing suicide, where the complainant would say that on that day as accused were not invited in the Page 17 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined marriage ceremony of younger brother Yogesh, therefore, there were quarrels between them, and prior to the incident the complaint was filed against them as well as against accused. The marriage occasion is of the year 1993. The grudge would have no connection with the deceased, to connect the cause.
6. As per the husband P.W.6, when he reached home he saw his daughter crying and his wife was lying in the toilet. He had inquired from his wife, at that time, the wife stated that their neighbours, who were relatives, Jayantibhai and his wife Gunvantiben and sons Khodidas, Mehul and Ketan, all of them since long were mentally and physically harassing her, and since she could not bear it she had taken the step.
7. As stated by learned advocate Mr. Bharda, the husband for the very first time came to know about the harassment, which rightly stated is unbelievable. Had the accused since long Page 18 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined harassing deceased mentally as well as physically, she certainly would have informed her husband. The husband could have filed complaint against accused or could have taken any further steps to restrain them from such an act. 7.1 The husband in his deposition further stated that at about 2:15 in the afternoon, the wife was alone and at that time Gunvantiben and her sons were passing by and as alleged, had stated that she was quarrelsome and that she was a rot in the family, therefore too, for that reason she had poured kerosene in her body.
8. The Investigating Officer though stated that he had recorded the statement of the witnesses neighbours - Kiranbhai Kanahiyabhai and Somabhai Punjabhai, none of them have been examined to corroborate the fact that in the afternoon Gunvantiben and her sons had uttered such disputed facts alleging her to be quarrelsome and a rot in the family.
Page 19 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined 8.1 It is required to be noted that the Trial Court has not believed the family relation of the deceased with accused. Such instance of rebuking deceased with such utterance, was on the road, the prosecution was required to prove the incident by examining the referred witnesses.
9. Exh.43 statement recorded by the witness P.W.8 - Harshadkumar Gnabhai, Head Constable, only records that in the afternoon at 2 O' clock, four of them had mentally harassed deceased and therefore, she poured kerosene on her body, while the statement does not refer to the utterance, which the husband (P.W.6) had stated in his deposition. The statement Exh.43 refers to the mental harassment in a continuous form through telephone. Had there been such telephonic conversation, then the prosecution was required to prove the records. Exh.43 states only of mental harassment. What was the harassment, how and in what manner she was subjected to such Page 20 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined mental harassment is not brought by the statement of deceased on record by Exh.43.
9.1 The dying declaration does not refer to such utterance by accused Gunvantiben and her sons Pinto, Mehul and Khodiya. It only records that because of mental harassment, she had smashed her forehead and caused injury and burned herself by pouring kerosene. Thus, the evidence of the husband of such an utterance on that day at 2:00 or 2:15 in the afternoon does not get proved by the dying declaration as well as the statement Exh.36. The dying declaration refers to harassment by Jayanti Talati. Such reference is made thrice in the dying declaration. The dying declaration would record that it was only because of harassment of Jayanti Talati she had committed suicide, while on that very day, no reference has been made of Jayanti Talati being present at 2:00 or 2:15 in the afternoon near the house of deceased. The presence of sons of accused Nos.1 Page 21 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined and 2 at the alleged place could not be proved. However, no cogent evidence could be brought on record by way of any documentary evidence to prove that they were writing the examination by the defence. Still the defence could bring it by way of evidence of the Investigating Officer, that such statement was given by the accused to the Investigating Officer.
9.2 The dying declaration, as recorded by P.W.5 though would say that the injured was conscious and in a fit state of mind at the time of recording of the dying declaration. However, it has also been brought on record that deceased could not have read the dying declaration, as she also had burn injuries on the eyes, but the fact remains that Executive Magistrate after ensuring from the Doctor had recorded the statement. Even if the dying declaration is taken into consideration for analysing the evidence on record to consider the case of any instigation, Page 22 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined then the incident of that day does not get proved. The deceased had not given specific details of that day, to allege that on the day of incident accused Gunvantiben and her sons had harassed her. The only general statement in the dying declaration is that all the accused have mentally harassed her and therefore, she had injured herself on the forehead and self emulated.
10. If dying declaration along with statement of the husband is to be considered, then the dispute was with regard to the official duty of accused No.1, who raised objection for the plot which was to be purchased by the younger brother. It appears that since Talati was residing in the neighborhood, all the members of the family came to be roped in the matter. This Court does not find any proximate cause to connect all the present accused to the incident, to consider it as a case of any abetment.
Page 23 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined
11. In the case of Abhinav Mohan Delkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., [2025 INSC 990:
2025 SCC OnLine SC 1725], the Hon'ble Supreme Court posed a question whether every allegation or accusation levelled, a reprimand or rebuke made, an insinuation or insult voiced or even continuous acts of ill-treatment, harassment and defamation; as alleged in this case, would lead to a charge of abetment, if the person at the receiving end commits suicide, is a vexed question the Courts are called upon to decide when a charge is raised under Section 306 of the Penal Code, 1860.
11.1 The Hon'ble Supreme Court has referred to the judgments of (i) Ude Singh Vs. State of Haryana [(2019) 17 SCC 301, (ii) State of West Bengal Vs. Orilal Jaiswal [(1994) 1 SCC 73],
(iii) Pawan Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh [(2017) 7 SCC 780], (iv) Amalendu Pal Vs. State of West Bengal [(2010) 1 SCC 707], (v) S.S. Page 24 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined Chheena Vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan [(2010) 12 SCC 190], (vi) Chitresh Kumar Chopra Vs. State (NCT of Delhi [(2009) 16 SCC 605], (vii) Madan Mohan Singh Vs. State of Gujarat [(2010) 8 SCC 628],
(viii) Prakash Vs. State of Maharashtra [2024 SCC OnLine SC 3835], (ix) Mangat Ram Vs. State of Haryana [(2012) 13 SCC 627], (x) State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal [(1992) Supp. (1) scc 335], to answer the question so raised.
11.2 The Hon'ble Supreme Court thereafter relying on various decisions, in paragraph Nos.22 and 23 observed as under:
"22. What comes out essentially from the various decisions herein before cited is that, even if there is allegation of constant harassment, continued over a long period; to bring in the ingredients of Section 306 read with Section 107, still there has to be a proximate prior act to clearly find that the suicide was the direct consequence of such continuous harassment, the last proximate incident having finally driven the subject to the extreme act of taking one's life. Figuratively, 'the straw Page 25 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined that broke the camel's back'; that final event, in a series, that occasioned a larger, sudden impact resulting in the unpredictable act of suicide. What drove the victim to that extreme act, often depends on individual predilections; but whether it is goaded, definitively and demonstrably, by a particular act of another, is the test to find mens rea. Merely because the victim was continuously harassed and at one point, he or she succumbed to the extreme act of taking his life cannot by itself result in finding a positive instigation constituting abetment. Mens rea cannot be gleaned merely by what goes on in the mind of the victim.
23. The victim may have felt that there was no alternative or option, but to take his life, because of what another person did or said; which cannot lead to a finding of mens rea and resultant abetment on that other person. What constitutes mens rea is the intention and purpose of the alleged perpetrator as discernible from the conscious acts or words and the attendant circumstances, which in all probability could lead to such an end. The real intention of the accused and whether he intended by his action to at least possibly drive the victim to suicide, is the sure test. Did the thought of goading the victim to suicide occur in the mind of the accused Page 26 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined or whether it can be inferred from the facts and circumstances arising in the case, as the true test of mens rea would depend on the facts of each case. The social status, the community setting, the relationship between the parties and other myriad factors would distinguish one case from another. However harsh or severe the harassment, unless there is a conscious deliberate intention, mens rea, to drive another person to suicidal death, there cannot be a finding of abetment under Section 306."
12. In the case of Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu versus State of West Bengal, (2010) 1 SCC 707, it has been held that in a case of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the deceased to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC would not be sustainable. 12.1 In the case of Rajesh v. State of Haryana, Page 27 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined (2020) 15 SCC 359 After considering the provisions of Sections 306 and 107 of IPC, the Court held that conviction under Section 306 IPC is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
12.2 In the case of Amudha v. State, 2024 INSC 244, it was held that there has to be an act of incitement on the part of the accused proximate to the date on which the deceased committed suicide. The act attributed should not only be proximate to the time of suicide but should also be of such a nature that the deceased was left with no alternative but to take the drastic step of committing suicide.
12.3 In the case of Mahendra Awase v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2025 (1) Crimes 347 (SC), the observations are made with regard to abetment of Page 28 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined suicide. It has been held that in order to bring a case within purview of Section 306 IPC, there must be a case of suicide and in commission of said offence, person who is said to have abetted commission of suicide must have played active role by act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate commission of suicide. It has been further observed that the act of abetment by person charged with said offence must be proved and established by prosecution before he could be convicted under Section 306 IPC. It is further observed that to satisfy requirement of instigation, accused by his act or omission or by a continued course of conduct should have created such circumstances that deceased was left with no other option, except to commit suicide. 12.4 In the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Orilal Jaiswal, [(1994) 1 SCC 73], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has cautioned in Para-17 as under: Page 29 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined "17. ... The Court should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial for the purpose of finding whether the cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end the life by committing suicide. If it transpires to the Court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance, discord and differences were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the Court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty...."
12.5 In the case of M. Mohan v. State Represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, [AIR 2011 SC 1238 : (2011) 3 SCC 626], the Hon'ble Apex Court has made the following observations regarding the ingredients of Section 306 IPC, referring to the word 'suicide', which reads thus:Page 30 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined "If the provisions for the offence under Section 306 are considered, it is evident that the basic ingredient regarding the intentional instigation are required to be proved or established. The word 'suicide' has not been defined. The word 'suicide' would mean the intentional killing of oneself. As per Concise Oxford Dictionary, 9th Edition, p.686, "A finding of suicide must be on evidence of intention. Every act of self destruction is, in common language described by the word 'suicide' provided it is an intentional act of a party knowing the probable consequence of what he is about. Suicide is never to be presumed. Intention is the essential legal ingredient." 12.6 In the case of Mahendra K.C. v. State of Karnataka and another, [(2022) 2 SCC 129], it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the essence of abetment lies in instigating a person to do a thing or the intentional doing of that thing by an act or illegal omission. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that Page 31 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation. 12.7 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.S. Chheena Vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan, [2010 (12) SCC 190] in regard to the abetment has held as under:
"25. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court is clear that in order to convict a person under Section 306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option Page 32 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide."
12.8 In the case of Nareshkumar v. State of Haryana, (2024) 3 SCC 573, wherein it was held that the basic ingredient to constitute an offence under Section 306 IPC are suicidal death and abetment thereof. Abetment involves the mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Thus, without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. Thus, in order to convict a person under Section 306, there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence and mere harassment, held, cannot be sufficient to hold an accused guilty of commission of suicide. Further, it was held that the prosecution has to prove an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide. It was held that ingredients of mens rea Page 33 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined cannot be assumed to be ostensibly present, but has to be visible and conspicuous. 12.9 In the case of Patel Babubhai Manohardas & Ors. v. State of Gujarat, 2025 (2) Crimes 213 SC, it has been held that abetment to commit suicide involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without positive proximate act on part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. Besides, in order to convict a person under Section 306 IPC, there has to be a clear mens rea to commit offence. The act attributed should not only be proximate to time of suicide, but should also be of such a nature that the deceased was left with no alternative, but to take drastic step of committing suicide. Until and unless, some guilty intention on part of the accused is established, it is ordinarily not possible to convict accused for an offence under Section 306 IPC. Page 34 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined 12.10 Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of accused, which led or compel deceased to commit suicide, would not make the conviction sustainable under Section 306 I.P.C. The act attributed should not only be proximate to the time of suicide, but should also be of such a nature that deceased was left with no alternative but to take the drastic step of committing suicide. To satisfy the requirement of instigation, accused by his act or omission or by continued course of conduct should have created such circumstances that deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide.
12.11 Here, in the present case, the incident which is alleged to have occurred in the afternoon is not proved. The husband of deceased was continuously with the victim - deceased. When the husband approached house after the wife Page 35 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined committing suicide, he saw his daughter crying, but no evidence is brought on record as to what were the neighbours doing or what was the immediate act of the neighbours after knowing of the incident. The investigation could not prove that accused No.2 and her children actually spoke such things which was inciting in nature in an extreme form, which drove the victim to that extent. Often the act depends on individual sense of predilections. Whether the act alleged was in the form of goading definitively and demonstrably, by a particular act of another, is the test to find mens rea. Merely because the victim was continuously harassed and at one point, he or she succumbed to the extreme act of taking his life cannot by itself result in finding a positive instigation constituting abetment, as observed in the case of Abhinav Mohan Delkar (supra), wherein it was also recorded that mens rea cannot be gleaned merely Page 36 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined by what goes on in the mind of the victim. What constitutes mens rea is the intention and purpose of the alleged perpetrator as discernible from the conscious acts or words and the attendant circumstances, which in all probability could lead to such an end. The real intention of the accused and whether he intended by his action to at least possibly drive the victim to suicide, is the sure test.
12.12 The wife of accused No.1 and the children, who were arraigned as rest of accused, possibly would not have any such thoughts of goading the victim to suicide. The circumstances, as has been tried to be projected by the prosecution immediately before the suicide is also not proved, nor can be said to be inferred from the facts and circumstances, as has been brought on record. Accused No.1, the Talati was not present at that time. The children were going for the examination. Thus, merely on allegation of Page 37 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined harassment without any positive act or with the alleged continued course of conduct, which appears to have created such circumstances that deceased was left with no option except to commit suicide, would be the essence of abetment which could be read with reasonable certainty unless proved cannot be believed. The word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation. The prosecution was required to prove an active act or direct act, which led deceased to commit suicide. The ingredients of mens rea cannot be assumed to be ostensibly present, but has to be visible and conspicuous. 12.13 The variation in the statements and the fact that deceased was not in a position to even read her own statement and when the immediate statement recorded by the P.S.O. does not clarify the alleged proximate act; and the circumstances also do not prove that accused had intended any Page 38 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined such consequences of deceased to take such extreme step, where actually the dealing was of accused No.1 as Talati with the younger brother and the husband of deceased, and when deceased and accused were not related to each other, there was no cause for accused to even make such utterance without any family connection. 12.14 The observations of the learned Judge thus, is not consistent with the principle laid down in the referred judgments as well as not consistent with the facts on record. The appreciation of evidence have been inconsistent when the Trial Court Judge had clearly concluded that accused had no family relation with deceased, which itself would have been the cause to draw the conclusion that there would not have been any such instigation or abetment from the side of accused for commission of suicide.
13. In view of the observations made herein above and the principle of law propounded in the Page 39 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2272/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/11/2025 undefined referred judgments, the appeal is allowed. The judgment of conviction and sentence dated 30.11.2006, passed by 6th Fast Track Judge, Mahesana in Sessions Case No.91/2006 is set aside. The appellants are acquitted from all the charges. Registry is directed to send the Record and Proceedings back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
(GITA GOPI,J) Pankaj/10 Page 40 of 40 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Fri Nov 14 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 15 03:20:28 IST 2025