Gujarat High Court
Bhavin Rajubhai Socha vs State Of Gujarat on 5 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY
SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 246 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
BHAVIN RAJUBHAI SOCHA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PREMAL S RACHH(3297) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.DARSHAN A. DAVE(7921) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR HK PATEL APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA
Date : 05/08/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule. Learned A.P.P. Mr.H.K. Patel waives service of Rule for the respondent no.1 - State and learned advocate Mr.Darshan Dave waives service of Rule for the respondent no.2.
2. With the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, present revision application is taken up for final hearing.
Page 1 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined
3. The present revision application, preferred by the applicant - original accused under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, the "BNSS"), is directed against the order dated 28.01.2025 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Devbhumi Dwarka at Khambhaliya in POCSO Case No.10 of 2024, rejecting the discharge application preferred by the present applicant vide exh.9.
4. The factual matrix of the present case are that a complaint has been given by one Vikrambhai Karubhai Barai before the Bhanvad police station, Devbhumi Dwarka on 28.07.2024 against two accused persons, namely, Bhavin Rajubhai Socha i.e. the present applicant and another accused - Jatinbhai Dhanjibhai @ Karubhai. 4.1. It is alleged by the complainant in the complaint that on 27.07.2024, his minor daughter has consumed poison and during the treatment, she was declared dead at G.G. Hospital, Jamnagar. At that time, he made a declaration Page 2 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined before the police that his daughter has committed suicide for some unknown reasons and it was registered as Accidental Death No.28 of 2024 under Section 194 of the B.N.S.S. Subsequently, after the postmortem was performed, her final rites and rituals have been completed. It is alleged in the complaint that the complainant was thinking that why his minor daughter has committed suicide and thereafter, he remembered that on 24.07.2024, the mother of complainant and his minor daughter went to Virnagar at eye-camp and, at that time, his minor daughter took the android mobile phone of his son - Jay and after the camp was over, on 27.07.2024, his daughter informed him that they were coming and that is why, the complainant went to bring his daughter and mother from the camp and when they were returning in Maruti van, one call came on the mobile phone of his son - Jay and his minor daughter was talking to somebody and she was telling 'sorry, she committed a mistake and next time this would not be repeated" and she was telling these words repeatedly and she was in a Page 3 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined very much frighting condition and, therefore, the complainant checked the phone of his son and after checking the same, it was found that the said call came from one mobile number 7778971200 and the conversation has been recorded in the mobile phone and upon hearing of the said recording, it was found that one Mr.Bhavin Socha, resident of Murila village of Lalpur Taluka was scolding with high speech and subsequently, another recording was also found wherein, it was found that as the present petitioner was scolding the minor daughter of the complainant and telling her not keep relations with the accused no.2 - Jatinbhai, as he is already married and after the said conversation ended, the minor daughter of the complainant has committed suicide. Hence, the complaint came to be lodged against both the accused persons under Sections 107, 75, 75(1)
(i), 75(1)(ii), 75(1)(iv), 78, 78(1)(i), 78(1)(ii) and 54 of the BNSS and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act and the same was registered vide C.R.No.11185001240710 of 2024. Thereafter, the police started investigation and Page 4 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined after the investigation was over, the police has filed a chargesheet against both the accused persons under Sections 107, 75, 75(1)(i), 75(1)(ii), 75(1)(iv), 78, 78(1)(i), 78(1)(ii) and 54 of the BNS and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.
4.2. Thereafter, the present applicant has given an application to get discharge from the said case vide exh.9, which came to be rejected by the learned Sessions Court, Khambhalia vide order dated 28.01.2025. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order, the present revision application has been preferred.
5. Learned advocate Mr.P.S. Rachh for the applicant submitted that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the chargesheet papers and considering the material produced on record, it appears that none of the ingredients of the offence under Section 107 r/w Section 54 of the BNS Act are satisfied against the present applicant and there are no allegations so far Page 5 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined as the offence punishable under Sections 107, 75, 75(1)
(i), 75(1)(ii), 75(1)(iv), 78, 78(1)(i), 78(1)(ii) and 54 of the BNS and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act is concerned. It is submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court is a non-speaking order, contrary to the facts on record, unjust, erroneous, against the provisions of law and, therefore, the same is required to be quashed and set aside. It is submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the so-called recording between the applicant and the deceased wherein, the applicant alleged to have threatened the deceased and thereby, it is alleged that the present applicant has compelled the deceased to commit suicide. It is submitted that the present applicant is implicated by the complainant for extraneous consideration to extract money and in the call recording, as submitted by the prosecution to prove its case against the present applicant, there is nothing in the said recording, which can constitute the offence of abatement, as provided under Section 45 of the BNS Act. It is submitted that on Page 6 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined bare perusal of the provisions of Section 107 of the BNS Act, it makes crystal clear that ingredients of the provisions of the said section are not satisfied and the same are not attracted against the present applicant and key elements of mens-rea and instigation, as required under Section 45 of the BNS Act, are missing. 5.1. It is submitted that no material has been produced to show that there is a clear mens-rea to commit an offence under Section 107 of the BNS by the present applicant and no direct or active role has been played by the present applicant. It is submitted that to frame the charge against the present applicant under Section 107 of the BNS Act, there has to be proper and specific allegation with regard to instigation and mens-rea on the part of the accused and further, there has to be proximate link between the incident and instigation to the deceased to commit suicide. It is submitted that in the present case, the key elements of mens-rea and instigation, as required under Section 107 of the BNS are missing. It is Page 7 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined submitted that there is neither any proper allegation regarding instigation nor any proximate link between the incident, instigation to the deceased by the applicant and factum of suicide, which has taken place. It is submitted that Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act would not be applicable to the present applicant as there is no iota of evidence placed on record to charge the applicant for the said offence.
5.2. In support of his arguments, learned advocate Mr.Rachh for the applicant has relied upon the following decisions:-
(i) Laxmi Das vs. State of West Bengal and another, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 120;
(ii) Mohit Singhal and another vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, reported in (2024) 1 SCC 417;
(iii) Jayedeepsing Pravinsinh Chavda and others vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (2025)2 SCC 116 and;Page 8 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined
(iv) Patel Babubhai Manohardas vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2025(3)SCR 432.
6. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr.Darshan Dave for the respondent no.2 - original complainant has vehemently opposed the present revision application and submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court is just and proper and does not require any interference. It is submitted that from the material produced along with the chargesheet papers and the conversation took place between the deceased and the present applicant, it clearly demonstrate that the present applicant has scolded the deceased like anything, who was a minor and even the present applicant has abused the minor girl and she was forced to commit suicide. It is further submitted that even from the statement of witnesses recorded by the investigating officer, more particularly, from the statement of Bhiniben - mother of the deceased, it clearly established that the present Page 9 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined applicant has instigated the deceased to commit suicide. Further, the statement of another independent witness - Mr.Hemantbhai Chetaria was also recorded and from his statement, it is clearly established that after the incident took place and the deceased committed suicide, the present applicant was inquiring from the said witness that whether the deceased has written any suicide note or whether she has given the name of the present applicant to any one or not and also, she admitted before the said witness that she was threatened very much and also threatened that they are coming to Shedhakhai village. It is submitted that looking to the said evidence, prima facie material has been produced by the investigating agency to frame the charge against the present applicant. 6.1. In support of his arguments, learned advocate Mr.Dave has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sajjan Kumar vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2010)9 SCC 368 and judgment of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the Page 10 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined case of Surjeet Khanna vs. State of Haryana and another rendered in CRM-M No.4079 of 2023.
7. Learned A.P.P. Mr.H.K. Patel for the respondent - State submitted that the order passed by the learned trial Court, rejecting the application for discharge, is just and proper and no illegality is committed in the impugned order. It is submitted that the present applicant has made phone calls to the deceased two times on that day. First time, it was for 43 seconds and subsequently, in the noon at about 14:20:58 hrs. The present applicant again made a phone call to the deceased and the conversation took place for about 313 seconds and immediately after the said conversation, the deceased committed suicide by consuming poison at 3:00 O'clock. It is submitted that after the conversation ended with the present applicant, within 25 minutes, the said unfortunate incident took place. It is further submitted that as per the transcript, it is clearly established that the present applicant, who has nothing to do with the relationship of the deceased with Page 11 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined the accused no.2, as alleged, that the applicant was posing himself as a brother of the wife of the accused no.2 and was threatening the minor girl aged about 17 years like anything, using abusive words and every time he was threatening the deceased by saying that they are coming to her village and they will disclose everything to her family members and the deceased was continuously telling 'sorry', 'sorry', 'sorry' "next time this will not happen". It is submitted that even in the conversation, the present applicant was telling the deceased that 'you just die' and within 20 to 25 minutes of the said telephonic conversation, the deceased committed suicide. It is submitted that there is a clear cut evidence of instigation by the present applicant and there is a close proximity that after the instigation, the deceased was driven to such a situation with no other option left, but to commit suicide. It is submitted that, therefore, the present revision application is required to dismissed.
8. After hearing the rival submissions of the learned Page 12 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined advocates for the respective parties, perusing the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court and also perusing the chargesheet papers, in exercise of revisional jurisdiction of this Court, it is profitable to peruse the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amit Kapoor vs. Ramesh Chander and another reported in 2012 LawSuit (SC) 609. In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court held in paras 8 and 9 as under:-
8. ....."Section 397 of the Code vests the court with the power to call for and examine the records of an inferior court for the purposes of satisfying itself as to the legality and regularity of any proceedings or order made in a case. The object of this provision is to set right a patent defect or an error of jurisdiction or law. There has to be a well-
founded error and it may not be appropriate for the court to scrutinize the orders, which upon the face of it bears a token of careful consideration and appear to be in accordance with law. If one looks into the various judgments of this Court, it emerges that the revisional jurisdiction can be invoked where the decisions under challenge are grossly erroneous, there is no compliance with the provisions of law, the finding recorded is based on no evidence, material evidence is ignored or judicial discretion is exercised arbitrarily or Page 13 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined perversely. These are not exhaustive classes, but are merely indicative. Each case would have to be determined on its own merits.
9. Another well-accepted norm is that the revisional jurisdiction of the higher court is a very limited one and cannot be exercised in a routine manner. One of the inbuilt restrictions is that it should not be against an interim or interlocutory order. The Court has to keep in mind that the exercise of revisional jurisdiction itself should not lead to injustice ex facie. Where the Court is dealing with the question as to whether the charge has been framed properly and in accordance with law in a given case, it may be reluctant to interfere in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction unless the case substantially falls within the categories aforestated. Even framing of charge is a much advanced stage in the proceedings under the Cr.P.C......"
9. Keeping in mind the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the present case, it is the case of the prosecution that the present applicant, posing himself as a so-called brother of one Jalpaben, who is the wife of the accused no.2 - Jatinbhai and the deceased - minor daughter of the original first informant, who is keeping relationship with the husband of Jalpaben, who is already Page 14 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined married, on 27.07.2024, the present applicant called the deceased on mobile phone and as per the case of the prosecution, the applicant scolded the deceased and intimidated her and because of that, the deceased, who is the minor daughter of the first informant aged about 17 years and 10 months, has committed suicide by consuming poison at about 3:00 p.m.
10. The argument advanced by the learned advocate for the applicant is that in the present case, there is no instigation or abatement by the present applicant nor there is mens-rea on the part of the present applicant.
11. Further, the learned advocate for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Laxmi Das (supra). In paras 8, 13 and 14 of the said judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:
"8. When Section 306 IPC is read with Section 107 IPC, it is clear that there must be (i) direct or Page 15 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined indirect instigation; (ii) in close proximity to the commission of suicide; along with (iii) clear mens rea to abet the commission of suicide.
9. The Appellant has placed strong reliance upon the judgement in Rohini Sudarshan Gangurde v. State of Maharashtra and Another1, wherein this Court has interpreted Sections 306 and 107 IPC together and observed:
"8. Reading these sections together would indicate that there must be either an instigation, or an engagement or intentional aid to 'doing of a thing'. When we apply these three criteria to Section 306, it means that the accused must have encouraged the person to commit suicide or engaged in conspiracy with others to encourage the person to commit suicide or acted (or failed to act) intentionally to aid the person to commit suicide.
...
13. After carefully considering the facts and evidence recorded by the courts below and the legal position established through statutory and judicial pronouncements, we are of the view that there is no proximate link between the marital dispute in the marriage of deceased with appellant and the commission of suicide. The prosecution has failed to collect any evidence to substantiate the allegations against the appellant. The Page 16 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined appellant has not played any active role or any positive or direct act to instigate or aid the deceased in committing suicide. Neither the statement of the complainant nor that of the colleagues of the deceased as recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation suggest any kind of instigation by the appellant to abet the commission of suicide. There is no allegation against the appellant of suggesting the deceased to commit suicide at any time prior to the commission of suicide by her husband."
10. In Prakash v. The State of Maharashtra and Another2, this Court has further interpreted the offence as below:
"13. Section 306 of the IPC has two basic ingredients-first, an act of suicide by one person and second, the abetment to the said act by another person(s). In order to sustain a charge under Section 306 of the IPC, it must necessarily be proved that the accused person has contributed to the suicide by the deceased by some direct or indirect act. To prove such contribution or involvement, one of the three conditions outlined in Section 107 of the IPC has to be satisfied.
14. Section 306 read with Section 107 of IPC, has been interpreted, time and again, and its Page 17 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined principles are well- established. To attract the offence of abetment to suicide, it is important to establish proof of direct or indirect acts of instigation or incitement of suicide by the accused, which must be in close proximity to the commission of suicide by the deceased. Such instigation or incitement should reveal a clear mens rea to abet the commission of suicide and should put the victim in such a position that he/she would have no other option but to commit suicide."
11. At this juncture, it is pertinent to refer to cases that define the act of 'instigation'. Accordingly, in Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, this Court observed:
"20. 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 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. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without Page 18 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation."
12. In the case of Mohit Singhal (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court in paras 10 and 11 held as under:-
"10. In the facts of the case, secondly and thirdly in Section 107, will have no application. Hence, the question is whether the appellants instigated the deceased to commit suicide. To attract the first clause, there must be instigation in some form on the part of the accused to cause the deceased to commit suicide. Hence, the accused must have mens rea to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. The act of instigation must be of such intensity that it is intended to push the deceased to such a position under which he or she has no choice but to commit suicide. Such instigation must be in close proximity to the act of committing suicide.
11. In the present case, taking the complaint of the third respondent and the contents of the suicide note as correct, it is impossible to conclude that the appellants instigated the deceased to commit suicide by demanding the payment of the amount borrowed by the third respondent from her husband by using abusive language and by assaulting him by a belt for that purpose. The said Page 19 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined incident allegedly happened more than two weeks before the date of suicide. There is no allegation that any act was done by the appellants in the close proximity to the date of suicide. By no stretch of the imagination, the alleged acts of the appellants can amount to instigation to commit suicide. The deceased has blamed the third respondent for landing in trouble due to her bad habits."
13. In the case of Jayedeepsing Pravinsinh Chavda (supra), in paras 17 to 22 and 26, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:-
"17. Section 306 of the IPC penalizes those who abet the act of suicide by another. For a person to be charged under this section, the prosecution must establish that the accused contributed to the act of suicide by the deceased. This involvement must satisfy one of the three conditions outlined in Section 107 of the IPC. These conditions include the accused instigated or encouraged the individual to commit suicide, conspiring with others to ensure that the act was carried out, or engaging in conduct (or neglecting to act) that directly led to the person taking his/her own life.
18. For a conviction under Section 306 of the IPC, it is a well-established legal principle that the Page 20 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined presence of clear mens rea--the intention to abet the act--is essential. Mere harassment, by itself, is not sufficient to find an accused guilty of abetting suicide. The prosecution must demonstrate an active or direct action by the accused that led the deceased to take his/her own life. The element of mens rea cannot simply be presumed or inferred; it must be evident and explicitly discernible. Without this, the foundational requirement for establishing abetment under the law is not satisfied, underscoring the necessity of a deliberate and conspicuous intent to provoke or contribute to the act of suicide. The same position was laid down by this Court in S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan5, wherein it was observed that:
"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 the Supreme 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 and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide."Page 21 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined
19. To bring a conviction under section 306, IPC it is necessary to establish a clear mens rea to instigate or push the deceased to commit suicide. It requires certain such act, omission, creation of circumstances, or words which would incite or provoke another person to commit suicide. This Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh6, defined the word "instigate" as under:
"20. 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 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. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation."
20. The essential ingredients to be fulfilled in order to bring a case under Section 306, IPC are: Page 22 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined i. the abetment;
ii. the intention of the accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide.
21. Thus, to bring a case under this provision, it is imperative that the accused intended by their act to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. Thus, in cases of death of a wife, the Court must meticulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as assess the evidence presented. It is necessary to determine whether the cruelty or harassment inflicted on the victim left them with no other option but to end their life. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be concrete proof of either direct or indirect acts of incitement that led to the suicide. Mere allegations of harassment are insufficient to establish guilt. For a conviction, there must be evidence of a positive act by the accused, closely linked to the time of the incident, that compelled or drove the victim to commit suicide.
22. It is essential to establish that the death was a result of suicide and that the accused actively abetted its commission. This can involve instigating the victim or engaging in specific actions that facilitated the act. The prosecution must prove beyond doubt that the accused played a definitive role in the abetment. Without clear evidence of an active role in provoking or Page 23 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined assisting the suicide, a conviction under Section 306 IPC cannot be sustained.
26. On a careful and close consideration of the facts and the material on record in the present case and in light of the law laid down by this Court regarding Section 306, IPC, there appears no proximate link between the alleged facts, instances of harassment and her subsequent death by hanging. The alleged incident of selling of gold ornaments and subsequent physical and mental harassment, as alleged, occurred almost a year before the FIR was registered at the instance of the father of the deceased. Even the statements of the deceased's cousins only mention instances which occurred a year prior to the death of the deceased. Further, selling of gold ornaments and the same was followed by discord and harassment upon their demand, even if true, do not reflect any intention to instigate, incite or provoke the deceased to commit suicide. Mere harassment and such issues between the wife and her husband along with the in-laws do not appear to create a scenario where she was left with no option other than to end her life. There is, therefore, absence of mens rea to instigate suicide of the deceased persons. Therefore, prima facie, it appears that the appellants did not have the requisite mens rea and neither did they commit any positive or direct act or omission to instigate or aid in the commission of suicide by the deceased." Page 24 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined
14. From the above judgments, relied upon by the learned advocate for the applicant, it emerges that to prove the offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, ingredients of abetment as provided under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code are required to be satisfied. Therefore, first of all, there must be a material regarding direct or indirect instigation by the accused and it must be in close proximity to the commission of suicide and may be along with clear mens-rea to abet in the commission of suicide. If these being satisfied, then only, the prima facie case can be made out under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. In the present case, so far as the present applicant is concerned, as per the case of the prosecution, the present applicant has committed an offence under Section 107 of the BNS (Old Section 305 of the IPC) and Section 45 of the BNS (old Section 107 of the IPC).
15. Now, it is profitable to peruse Section 107 of the BNS and Section 45 of the BNS, which read as under:- Page 25 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined "107. Abetment of suicide of child or person of unsound mind: If any child, any person of unsound mind, any delirious person or any person in a state of intoxication, commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with death or imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
45. Abetment of a thing: A person abets the doing of a thing, who--
(a) instigates any person to do that thing; or
(b) engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or
(c) intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing Explanation 1.--A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing.
Illustration.
Page 26 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined A, a public officer, is authorised by a warrant from a Court to apprehend Z. B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z, wilfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the apprehension of C. Explanation 2.--Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act."
16. Upon plain reading of both the above Sections, now, so far as the facts of the present case are concerned, as per the case of the prosecution, on the date of incident i.e. on 27.07.2024, the present applicant has called the deceased on mobile phone, who is aged about 17 years and 10 months, firstly, at about 14:19:51 and the said conservation was for 43 seconds and again, the present applicant has called the deceased on the same day i.e. on 27.07.2024 at about 14:20.58 and the said conservation took place for about 313 seconds and after the said conversation, within 20 or 25 minutes, the deceased i.e. Page 27 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined the minor daughter of the first informant, has committed suicide by consuming poison.
17. From the transcript of the conversation, which has been part of the chargesheet papers, it is found that the present applicant was intimidating the deceased like anything, constantly threatening the deceased and also threatening her not to keep relations with the accused no.2 - Jatinbhai, by posing himself as a brother of the wife of the accused no.2. Further, even during the conversation, the present applicant used abusive language and words to the deceased and constantly telling the deceased that "when will you reach your home", "I will come with my other family members", "we will expose you before your family", "we will tarnish your image in the village" and the applicant constantly inquiring from the deceased that when she will reach at home because, at the time of first conversation, the deceased was in the ECO car, coming from Virnagar to their village: Shedhakhai. Further, during the Page 28 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined conversation, the present applicant told the deceased by advising her to die. So, considering the whole conversation, it seems from the transcript that the deceased was constantly saying "sorry", "sorry" to the present applicant but, the applicant never stopped intimidating the deceased and constantly threatening her and when the conversation ended at about 2:25 or 2:27 p.m. in the afternoon, at about 3:00 p.m., the deceased committed suicide.
18. Further, from the chargesheet papers, it also appears that one of the witnesses - Mr.Hemantbhai Chetaliya, who is an independent witness and relative of the present applicant, in his statement, he stated that after they came to know that the daughter of the complainant has committed suicide, the said witness told this thing to the present applicant and at that time, the present applicant stated that he has taken the phone number of the deceased from the phone of accused no.2 - Jatinbhai and he threatened and intimidated the deceased Page 29 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined on phone and also inquired from the said witness, whether the deceased has written any suicide note or whether she has stated anything to the police or not. Therefore, considering the overall material produced along with the chargesheet, the conduct of the present applicant, while he was talking with the deceased, shows that it led the deceased to depression and fear and she was minor at the relevant time and because of that, she was put to such a situation that she did not find any alternative but to commit suicide within 25 minutes after the conversation with the present applicant was ended. Further, looking to the transcript also, it clearly establishes the mens-rea on the part of the present applicant. From the material produced along with the chargesheet, there is a direct action by the present applicant and also instigation and it was within a very close proximity of the commission of suicide. Therefore, from the conversation and the conduct, mens-rea and guilty mind is also been prima facie established. Therefore, from the overall material produced along with Page 30 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined the chargesheet papers, there is a sufficient evidence against the present applicant and the role attributed to the present applicant gives a grave suspicion and, therefore, also there is a sufficient material to frame the charge against the present applicant.
19. Further, I have also perused the findings recorded by the learned trial Court wherein, the learned trial Court, while rejecting the application for discharge, in the impugned order, recorded that from the material produced along with the chargesheet, the Court has not to consider whether the evidence will bring home the conviction or whether it resulted into acquittal but, whether there is a material produced, by which, it can be inferred that there is no prima facie case has been established against the present applicant and the accused can be discharged or whether there is sufficient evidence to frame the charge or not, is required to be considered. The learned trial Court has also recorded that considering the transcript between the present applicant Page 31 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/246/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/08/2025 undefined and the deceased, there is a sufficient evidence, prima facie, found against the present applicant to frame the charge against him. Hence, the findings recorded by the learned trial Court are just and proper and I do not find any illegality which would warrant any interference in the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court.
20. Accordingly, no case is made out to entertain the present revision application. Hence, present Criminal Revision Application No.246 of 2025 is hereby rejected. The order dated 28.01.2025 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Devbhoomi Dwarka at Khambhaliya in POCSO Case No.10 of 2024, rejecting the discharge application of the present applicant below exh.9, is hereby confirmed. Rule is discharged.
(L. S. PIRZADA, J) Hitesh Page 32 of 32 Uploaded by PANCHAL HITESHKUMAR JAGDISHBHAI(HC00195) on Tue Aug 19 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 22 22:39:07 IST 2025