Balaji Jaiswal vs State Of Chhattisgarh

2026 INSC 375 REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (@ SLP (CRL.) NO.14640 OF 2025)

BALAJI JAISWAL APPELLANT

VERSUS

STATE OF CHATTISGARH RESPONDENTS AND ANOTHER

JUDGMENT

ATUL S. CHANDURKAR, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated

08.04.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of the

Chhattisgarh High Court1 in CRR No.450 of 2025. By the

said order, the challenge made by the appellant to the

order framing charge against him under Section 306 read

with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18602 on

16.12.2024 has been turned down.

Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by NIDHI AHUJA Date: 2026.04.16 17:35:20 IST Reason:

1 For short, “the High Court” 2 For short, “the Penal Code”

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 1 of 17

3. As per the First Information Report dated

07.10.2024, information was received of the death of one

Komal Sahu by the Police Station In-charge at Pipariya

Police Station. The death had occurred on account of

hanging from a Babool tree in the village. As per the

postmortem report, the cause of death was on account of

‘Asphyxia’. Investigation was thereafter undertaken and a

Special Investigation Team was formed for that purpose.

After receiving a report from the Investigating Team, final

report came to be filed on 05.12.2024. As per the final

report, there was no factual evidence noted of the deceased

being murdered. However, evidence was found that the

death had occurred on account of suicide by hanging. As

per the statements of various witnesses, the wife of the

deceased Revati Bai had insulted Komal several times in

front of the appellant. The appellant and Revati Bai had

illicit relations and, hence, it was stated that the deceased

had no option but to commit suicide. Accordingly, the final

report named the appellant as the first accused while

Revati Bai was named as the second accused.

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 2 of 17

4. On 16.12.2024, the following charge came to be

framed:

“You on 06.05.2024 and 07.05.2024 between 06.00 to 11.30 PM at central gram: Dharampura, Station: Piapriya, District- Kabirdham, Chattisgarh, tortured and abetted deceased Komal Sahu to commit suicide resulting which Komal Sahu committed suicide by hanging and through this you have such an act which is punishable under section 306 of Indian Penal Code and this court has taken cognizance of this act” Alternative to this “You on 06.05.2024 and 07.05.2024 between 06.00 to 11.30 PM at central gram: Dharampura, Station: Piapriya, District- Kabirdham, Chattisgarh, along with co-accused Revati Bai together with common intention tortured and abetted deceased Komal Sahu to commit suicide resulting which Komal Sahu committed suicide by hanging and through this you have such an act which is punishable under section 306/34 of Indian Penal Code and this court has taken cognizance of this act”

5. The appellant being aggrieved by the framing of the

said charge filed a revision application under Section 438

read with Section 442 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Suraksha

Sanhita, 20233 for challenging the said order. It was urged

that from the material collected by the prosecution it could

not be said that the appellant had abetted the commission

of suicide by the deceased. Thus, no offence under Section

306 of the Penal Code had been made out. The prosecution

3 For short, “the BNSS”

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 3 of 17 opposed the aforesaid application. The High Court after

hearing all the parties held that on the basis of statements

of various family members of the deceased, it was clear

that on account of the behaviour of the accused persons,

the deceased was annoyed and, hence, committed suicide.

It accordingly dismissed the revision application by

holding that, prima facie, the ingredients of Section 306 in

the alternative Section 306/34 of the Penal Code had been

satisfied and there was sufficient material to proceed with

the charge. Thus, by the order dated 08.04.2025 the

revision application came to be dismissed. Being

aggrieved, the appellant has raised a challenge to the said

order in this appeal.

6. Mr. Anand P. Pande, learned counsel appearing for

the appellant submitted that even after taking all the

material that forms part of the charge sheet cumulatively,

the same was insufficient to charge the appellant under

Section 306 of the Penal Code. There was no allegation

against the appellant that on account of some proximate

act committed by him, Komal was led to commit suicide

on 07.05.2024. In fact, the material collected by the

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 4 of 17 prosecution in the form of statements of family members

and neighbours indicated that on the night of 05.05.2024,

the appellant and Komal had consumed liquor together.

Thereafter, both were seen talking amongst themselves.

Suicide by Komal was noticed on 07.05.2024 when his

body was found hanging. Even assuming all the

statements recorded to be correct, the said material was

insufficient to charge the appellant of having abetted the

suicide of Komal. In fact, some statements indicated that

Komal used to fight with his wife while asking for money

to drink liquor. In absence of any suicide note left by the

deceased and there being no alleged act being committed

by the appellant so as to instigate Komal to commit

suicide, no purpose would be served by requiring the

appellant to face trial for the charge under Section 306 of

the Penal Code. The allegations of an affair between the

appellant and the wife of the deceased were hearsay in

nature. That aspect was also not material in the present

context. The learned counsel for the appellant placed

reliance upon the decisions in Sanju @ Sanjay Singh

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 5 of 17 Sengar Vs. State of M.P.4 and Prakash and others Vs.

The State of Maharashtra and another5 to substantiate

his contentions. He, thus, submitted that the High Court

ought to have quashed the criminal proceedings in the

absence of any material, whatsoever, for proceeding

against the appellant.

7. Per contra, Ms. Ankita Sharma, learned counsel

appearing for the first respondent opposed the aforesaid

submissions. According to her, the conduct of the

appellant indicating an illicit relationship with the wife of

Komal was conduct that amounted to abetment of suicide

by Komal. The statements recorded indicated that Revati

Bai used to humiliate Komal in the presence of the

appellant and that led to Komal committing suicide. The

absence of any suicide note was not very material at this

stage and was a matter of trial. The consistent statements

by members of the family of the deceased as well as

neighbours indicated that in view of the illicit relationship

between the appellant and Revati Bai, Komal had no

4 2002 INSC 250 5 2024 INSC 1020

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 6 of 17 option but to commit suicide. The charge as framed by the

Trial Court was, thus, justified and the appellant ought to

meet the said charge during trial. The learned counsel

placed reliance on the decisions in Ramesh Kumar Vs.

State of Chattisgarh6 and Dammu Sreenu Vs. State of

A.P.7 in that regard. It was, thus, submitted that the High

Court having refused to quash the proceedings, the

impugned order did not call for any interference. The

appeal was, thus, liable to be dismissed.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at

length and with their assistance, we have perused the

entire documentary material on record that forms part of

the charge sheet. Having given due consideration to the

relevant factual aspects and bearing in mind the legal

position as settled, we are of the view that the prayer made

by the appellant deserves to be granted and the criminal

proceedings qua the appellant deserve to be quashed. We

would indicate our reasons hereinafter.

6 2001 INSC 515 7 2009 INSC 846

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 7 of 17

9. For the purposes of examining the challenge as

raised by the appellant to the framing of charge under

Section 306 of the Penal Code and in the alternative under

Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, it

would be necessary to bear in mind the law as laid down

by this Court in its earlier decisions. This Court in R.P.

Kapur Vs. State of Punjab8 has held that there are three

categories of cases where the High Court in exercise of its

inherent jurisdiction can quash criminal proceedings. One

such category stipulated is that where the allegations in

the First Information Report or the complaint, even if taken

at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not

constitute the offence as alleged, the institution or

continuation of criminal proceedings against an accused

may amount to abuse of the process of the Court or that

the quashing of such proceedings would secure the ends

of justice.

Similarly, in State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch.

Bhajan Lal and others9, this position was reiterated that

8 (1960) 3 SCR 388 9 1990 INSC 363

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 8 of 17 if even after taking all allegations made in the First

Information Report or complaint at their face value and

accepting them in their entirety do not prima facie

constitute any offence, the proceedings can be quashed.

10. The charge as framed against the appellant is under

Section 306 and in alternate under Section 306 read with

Section 34 of the Penal Code. In this regard, we may refer

to a recent decision in Prakash and others (supra) to which

one of us (K.V. Viswanathan, J.) was a party. Therein, the

appellants had sought discharge from the criminal

proceedings filed under Section 306 of the Penal Code.

Dealing with the ingredients of Section 306 read with

Section 107 of the Penal Code, it was held as under:

“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 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

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 9 of 17 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.

15. The law on abetment has been crystallised by a plethora of decisions of this Court. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating or intentionally aiding another person to do a particular thing. To bring a charge under Section 306 of the IPC, the act of abetment would require the positive act of instigating or intentionally aiding another person to commit suicide.

Without such mens rea on the part of the accused person being apparent from the face of the record, a charge under the aforesaid Section cannot be sustained. Abetment also requires an active act, direct or indirect, on the part of the accused person which left the deceased with no other option but to commit suicide.

xxxxxxxxxxxx

18. More recently, in the case of Jayedeepsinh Pravinsinh Chavda and Others v. State of Gujarat10, this Court has relied on S.S.Chheena (supra) to hold that the element of mens rea cannot simply be presumed or inferred, instead it must be evident and explicitly discernible. Without this, the foundational requirement for establishing abetment under the law, that is deliberate and conspicuous intention to provoke or contribute to the act of suicide, would remain unfulfilled. This Court observed as follows:

“18. For a conviction under Section 306 of the IPC, it is a well-established legal principle that the 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

10 2024 INSC 960 : [2024] 12 SCR 439: 2024 SCC OnLine 3679

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 10 of 17 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.”

19. It is, therefore, evident that the positive act of instigation is a crucial element of abetment. While dealing with an issue of a similar nature, this Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh11, laid down the parameters of what would be constituted to be an act of instigation. This Court observed as follows:-

“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. It could thus be seen that this Court observed that instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do “an act”. It has been held that in order 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

11 2001 INSC 515 : [2001] Supp. 4 SCR 247: (2001) 9 SCC 618

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 11 of 17 consequence, however, a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. Applying the law to the facts of the case, this Court went on to hold that a word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.

xxxxxxxxxxx

26. Thus, this Court has consistently taken the view that instigation or incitement on the part of the accused person is the gravamen of the offence of abetment to suicide. However, it has been clarified on many occasions that in order to link the act of instigation to the act of suicide, the two occurrences must be in close proximity to each other so as to form a nexus or a chain, with the act of suicide by the deceased being a direct result of the act of instigation by the accused person.”

11. From the aforesaid decision, it becomes clear that

for sustaining a charge under Section 306 of the Penal

Code, it has to be shown that the accused persons had

contributed to the suicide by the deceased through some

direct or indirect act. Section 107 of the Penal Code has

thereafter been referred to hold that there ought to be some

instigation or incitement that would reveal a clear mens

rea to abet the commission of suicide, thus, leading the

victim to such a position that he/she would have no other

option but to commit suicide. There ought to be some

material to indicate a positive act of instigation, which is a

crucial component of abetment. Instigation or incitement

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 12 of 17 on the part of the accused person has been held to be the

gravamen of the offence of abetment to suicide. The act of

instigation also has to be in close proximity to the act of

suicide so as to form the nexus or a chain to indicate that

the act of suicide was the direct result of the act of

instigation by the accused person. Incidentally, the

decision in Ramesh Kumar (supra) cited by the learned

counsel for the first respondent has been considered and

relied upon in Prakash and others (supra).

12. The material forming part of the charge sheet would,

therefore, have to be examined keeping in mind the above

perspective. Existence of all the ingredients constituting

the alleged offence would be necessary. On going through

the various statements recorded by the prosecution, the

same indicate that deceased Komal was addicted to liquor

and that the appellant and Komal used to have liquor

together. The son of the deceased, Aakash, had stated that

whenever his father used to drink from his money, Revati

Bai used to scold him. However, when the appellant used

to bring liquor for him, she did not object. In his

subsequent statement recorded after about five months

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 13 of 17 from the incident, he suspected that there were illicit

relations between his mother and the appellant.

Statements of other family members and neighbours

indicate the addiction of Komal to liquor. Except such

statements and general allegations of illicit relationship

between Revati Bai and the appellant, there is no material

whatsoever to indicate any instigation or incitement at the

instance of the appellant that could lead to Komal

committing suicide. On 05.05.2024, the appellant had

been to the house of Komal and they had liquor together

between 09:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. There is no material

whatsoever indicating any act of instigation or incitement

or abetment by the appellant. The suicide was stated to

have been committed in the morning of 07.05.2024. No

material whatsoever as regards the proximity between the

meeting of the appellant and the deceased, and his

committing suicide is available on record. It, thus, will

have to be held that the requirements of Section 107 of the

Penal Code are not satisfied in the present case.

13. Even if we proceed on the premise that there were

illicit relations between the appellant and the wife of the

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 14 of 17 deceased, the clear mens rea to abet the commission of

suicide by Komal is absent. As held, to bring home a

charge under Section 306 of the Penal Code, the act of

abetment would require some positive act of instigating or

intentionally aiding another person to commit suicide.

There is no allegation that the appellant had instigated

Komal to commit suicide or that he had in some way aided

any act or illegal omission to bring about the suicide.

Further, there is no material on record to infer that Komal

was left with no other option except to commit suicide. In

the absence of such mens rea on the part of the accused

being apparent from the face of record, the charge under

Section 306 of the Penal Code cannot be sustained.

14. We, therefore, find that even after accepting the

entire material on record at its face value, the ingredients

of Section 306 of the Penal Code are not satisfied.

Continuation of such criminal proceedings would,

therefore, be a futile exercise resulting in the absence of

process of law. We may reiterate what this Court said in

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 15 of 17 paragraph 9 in Madan Mohan Singh Vs. State of Gujarat

and another12 are as follows:-

“In the prosecution under Section 306, IPC, much more material is required. The Courts have to be extremely careful as the main person is not available for cross-examination by the appellant/accused. Unless, therefore, there is specific allegation and material of definite nature (not imaginary or inferential one), it would be hazardous to ask the appellant/accused to face the trial.”

The proceedings, therefore, deserve to be quashed.

The High Court failed to examine the material on record in

the light of the law laid down in this regard. It, therefore,

erred in not quashing the proceedings. The ratio of the

decision in Dammu Sreenu (supra) relied upon by the

learned counsel for the first respondent is clearly

distinguishable as it arises from a challenge to the

conviction of the appellant therein based on the evidence

on record.

15. For the aforesaid reasons, the order dated

08.04.2025 passed in CRR No. 450 of 2025 by the High

Court is set aside. The charge framed against the appellant

in Sessions Case No.80 of 2024 by the learned Sessions

12 2010 INSC 521

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 16 of 17 Judge, Kabirdham stands quashed. Consequently, the

appellant is discharged from the aforesaid criminal

proceedings. It is clarified that the present adjudication is

restricted to the case of the appellant-accused No.1. The

trial against accused No.2 shall proceed uninfluenced by

any observations made herein.

16. The criminal appeal is, accordingly, allowed.

17. Pending applications are also disposed of.

…..………………………..J. [ K.V. VISWANATHAN ]

…..………………………..J. [ATUL S. CHANDURKAR]

NEW DELHI, APRIL 16, 2026.

Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.14640 of 2025 Page 17 of 17