The Supreme Court has quashed criminal proceedings against six persons accused of abetting the suicide of a woman after her lover allegedly refused to marry her, holding that a refusal to marry following a consensual relationship cannot, by itself, be treated as abetment to suicide.
The case arose from the suicide of a woman who had been living with the first appellant, her alleged lover, for around three months.
The Supreme Court directed that the accused, if in custody, be released forthwith unless required in any other case. A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. The victim’s siblings alleged that the first appellant refused to marry her, following which she took the extreme step. The FIR was registered on the basis of a statement given by the sister of the woman who committed suicide. It was alleged that the first appellant’s friend had spoken ill of the woman who died, while his sister and parents had opposed the relationship. The prosecution further alleged that the sister’s proposed bridegroom had refused to marry her if the first appellant married the victim, leading to pressure on the relationship. In its order, the Justice Pardiwala-led Bench recorded that the victim had called her eldest sister before taking the extreme step and informed her that the first appellant had refused to marry her. “We are unable to find any instigation by the accused/appellants to drive the victim to death by suicide. It further ordered that their bail bonds would stand cancelled if they were already on bail.
The victim had been living with the first appellant at his house, and their relationship was consensual, according to the prosecution. However, the Supreme Court said there was no material to establish that the accused had instigated the victim to commit suicide. It was neither intended nor can it be said to be abetment,” the order said.
Vinod Chandran set aside the proceedings pending before the II Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri District in Telangana’s Kushaiguda, observing that there was no material to establish instigation by the accused to drive the woman to suicide.
