- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4514 OF 2023 BETWEEN: M V RAJANNA S/O LATE. VEERANNA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 24, 1ST CROSS, GOVINDARAJU LAYOUT, NAGASHETTYHALLI, RMV 2ND STAGE BENGALURU-560 094. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SUBBA REDDY K.N, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DODDABALLAPURA RURAL POLICE STATION BENGALURU-561203 REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX, BENGALURU-560001. 2. SRI.B.S.MURALI S/O LATE M.SHANKAREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, RESIDENT OF BACHCHAHALLI VILLAGE, ANTHARAHALLI POST, TUBAGERE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. PIN CODE-561 203. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, LEARNED ADDL. SPP FOR R1 SRI. H.P. LEELADHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CR.NO.268/2022, ANNEXURE-T OF THE DODDABALLAPURA RURAL P.S., REGISTERED FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 306 OF IPC AGAINST HIM AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C AT DODDABALLAPURA. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner, sole accused, who now faces the allegation of abetment to suicide punishable under Section 306 of the IPC for the suicide of father of the complainant stands at the doors of this Court seeking its quashment. 2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel Mr.D.R.Ravishankar, appearing for the petitioner, the learned counsel Mr.H.P.Leeladhar, representing for the respondent- complainant and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor Mr. B.N. Jagadeesha representing the State. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 3. The facts enumerated are as follows: The petitioner is a practicing advocate. Certain civil litigations were pending between the family of the deceased and one Jayarame Gowda for close to 3 decades prior to the date of death. The issue in the lis pertains to a certain piece of land of 4 acres and 10 guntas, which was placed as surety to a particular transaction. Though the loan had been cleared on the act of the present petitioner, it is alleged that the land had not been released on the said surety. Therefore, the father of the complainant consumes poison and commits suicide. The axe of abetment to suicide now falls upon the present petitioner. The moment the crime is registered, the petitioner is at the doors of this Court and this Court has protected the interest of the petitioner by grant of an interim order of stay of further investigation. 4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, taking this court through the documents appended to the petition, would seek to demonstrate that the allegations made in the complaint by the son is that the petitioner had hurled abuse against the complainant's father - "go and die", - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 and further, that the land which was subject matter of surety was not released or despite released was not handed over all by the acts of the present petitioner. Learned Senior counsel would submit that none of the ingredients that are necessary to drive home an offence under Section 306 of the IPC, for which the ingredients of Section 107 of the IPC are necessary to be present, are conspicuously absent in the case at hand. He would therefore seek quashment of the proceedings. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant would reiterate the contents of the complaint and contend that the matter is at the stage of investigation. In a case for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC, which is abetment to suicide, investigation in the least must be permitted to be continued. Therefore, he would seek dismissal of the petition. 6. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would also toe the lines of the counsel appearing for the complainant and seeking dismissal of the petition and conduct of investigation. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 8. The afore-narrated facts and dates linked in the chain of events are all a matter of record. The petitioner now stands charged albeit by way of an FIR for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC. Since the entire issue has now triggered from the complaint, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint. The complaint reads as follows: "zÉÆqÀا¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ UÁæªÀiÁAvÀgÀ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉAiÀÄ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉAiÀÄ ¥Éưøï E£ïì¥ÉPÀÖgï gÀªÀjUÉ zÉÆqÀا¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ. ªÀÄÄgÀĽ ©.J¸ï.©£ï JA. ±ÀAPÀgÉÃUËqÀ 26 ªÀµÀð, MPÀÌ°UÀgÀÄ, ªÁå¥ÁgÀ §ZÀѺÀ½î UÁæªÀÄ, CAvÀgÀºÀ½î CAZÉ, vÀƧUÉgÉ ºÉÆç½, zÉÆqÀا¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¥ÉÆÃ£ï £ÀA.7349494158 DzÀ £Á£ÀÄ ¤ÃqÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ zÀÆgÀÄ. K£ÉAzÀgÉ £Á£ÀÄ ªÉÄð£À «¼Á¸ÀzÀ°è ªÁ¸ÀªÁV zÉÆqÀا¼Áî¥ÀÄgÀ mË£ï, J.¦.JA.¹ ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖAiÀÄ°è ªÉÆmÉÖ ªÁå¥ÁgÀ ªÀiÁrPÉÆArgÀÄvÉÛãÉ. £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉ ±ÀAPÀgÉÃUËqÀ vÁ¬Ä D£ÀAzÀªÀÄä gÀªÀjUÉ E§âgÀÄ ªÀÄPÀ̼ÀÄ F ¥ÉÊQ 1 UÀAqÀÄ MAzÀÄ ºÉtÄÚ 1£Éà ªÀÄÄgÀĽ DzÀ £Á£ÀÄ 2£Éà 21 ªÀµÀð ªÀAiÀĹì£À £À£Àß vÀAV ©.J¸ï. dAiÀIJæà DVgÀÄvÉÛêÉ. £ÀªÀÄäUÁåjUÀÆ ªÀÄzÀÄªÉ DVgÀĪÀÅ¢®è. £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉ ¨Á±ÉnÖºÀ½î §½ EgÀĪÀ ¨ÁA¨É gÀAiÀiÁ£ï ¥ÁåPÀÖjAiÀÄ°è PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛzÀÝgÀÄ. £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉUÉ £ÀªÀÄä UÁæªÀÄzÀ ¸ÀªÉð £ÀA.53/5 gÀ°è JgÀqÀÄ JPÀgÉ d«ÄãÀÄ EvÀÄÛ. FUÉÎ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 25 ªÀµÀðzÀ »AzÉ £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉUÉ ºÀtzÀ CªÀ±ÀåPÀvÉ EzÀÄÝzÀjAzÀ d«Ää£À ªÉÄÃ¯É ¨ÁåAQ¤AzÀ ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß ¸Á® ¥ÀqÉAiÀĨÉÃPÉAzÀÄ NqÁqÀÄwÛzÁÝUÀ £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉAiÀÄ zÉÆqÀØöªÀÄä£À ªÀÄUÀ¼ÁzÀ dAiÀĪÀÄä gÀªÀgÀ ¥Àw dAiÀÄgÁªÉÄÃUËqÀ JA§ÄªÀªÀgÀ £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉAiÀÄ §½ ¤Ã£ÀÄ ¨ÁåAQ¤AzÀ KPÉ ¸Á® - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 vÉUÉAiÀÄPÉƼÀÄîwÛÃAiÀiÁ. CzÉà d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß £À£Àß ºÉ¸ÀjUÉ ±ÀÆjnAiÀiÁV CVæªÉÄAmï ªÀiÁrPÉÆqÀÄ £Á£Éà ¤£ÀUÉ ¸Á® PÉÆqÀÄvÉÛ£É §rØ PÀnÖPÉÆAqÀÄ ºÉÆÃV CAvÀ ºÉýzÀÝjAzÀ £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉUÉ CµÀÄÖ w¼ÀĪÀ½PÉ E®èzÉà EzÀÄÝzÀjAzÀ ¨ÁAqï ¥ÉÃ¥ÀgÀÄ ªÉÄÃ¯É ¸À» ªÀiÁr 20,000/-gÀÆ. ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀqÉzÀÄPÉÆArzÀÄÝ, MAzÀÄ ªÀµÀðzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉ dAiÀÄgÁªÉÄÃUËqÀ gÀªÀgÀ PÀqɬÄAzÀ ¥ÀqÉ¢ÝzÀ ¸Á®zÀ ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß §rØ ¸ÀªÉÄÃvÀ »vÀÄgÀÄV¹zÁUÀ £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉ ¸À» ªÀiÁrzÀÄÝ, ¥ÀvÀæªÀ£ÀÄß ªÁ¥À¸ÀÄ ¤ÃqÀzÉ d«ÄãÀÄ £À£ÀßzÉà CAvÀ ºÉüÀÄwÛzÀÝgÀÄ F §UÉÎ £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ zÉÆqÀØ¥Àà vÉÆÃlzÀ¥Àà gÀªÀgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÉÃj £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ¹«®Ä zÁªÉ ºÀÆrzÀÝgÀÄ. »ÃVgÀĪÀ°è dAiÀÄgÁªÉÄÃUËqÀ ªÀgÀªÀ ªÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¨sÁUÀåªÀÄä¼À UÀAqÀ ªÀÄgÀ¼ÉãÀºÀ½î ºÁ° ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÁUÀ±ÉnÖºÀ½î ªÁ¹ JA.«. gÁdtÚ gÀªÀgÀÄ F ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 4-5 ªÀµÀðzÀ »AzÉ ¸ÀzÀj d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß vÀ£Àß ªÀÄPÀ̼ÁzÀ DzÀ±Àð JA.Dgï. D±ÀæAiÀiï JA.Dgï gÀªÀgÀÄUÀ¼À ºÉ¸ÀjUÉ zÁ£À ¥ÀvÀæ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ ºÁV «¯ï ªÀiÁr¹ d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß vÀ£Àß E§âgÀÄ ªÀÄPÀ̼À ºÉ¸ÀjUÉ dAn SÁvÉ ªÀiÁr¹gÀÄvÁÛ£É. F §UÉÎ £ÁªÀÅUÀ¼ÀÄ PÉüÀ®Ä ºÉÆÃzÁUÀ £ÀªÀÄUÉ gÁdtÚ £ÀªÀgÀÄ ¨ÉzÀj¹ F d«ÄãÀÄ £ÀªÀÄäzÀÄ ¤ÃªÀÅ K£ÀÆ ªÀiÁqÀ°PÉÌ DUÀĪÀÅ¢®è. d«ÄãÀÄ «ZÁgÀPÉÌ §AzÀgÉ ¸Á¬Ä¹ ©qÀÄvÉÛãÉAzÀÄ §JzÀjPÉ ºÁPÀÄwÛzÀÝgÀÄ. F »AzÉ £ÁªÀÅ d«Ää£À §½ ºÉÆÃUÀzÉà EzÀÝgÀÆ £ÁªÀÅUÀ¼ÀÆ d«ÄäUÉ CwPÀæªÀÄ ¥ÀæªÉñÀ ªÀiÁrgÀÄvÉÛêÉAzÀÄ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉAiÀÄ°è zÀÆgÀÄ ¤Ãr £ÀªÀÄä «gÀÄzÀÞ ¥ÀæPÀgÀt zÁR°¹zÀÝgÀÄ. ¸ÀzÀj ¥ÀæPÀgÀt £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ ¹.¹.£ÀA.1456/17 gÀ°è «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ°è EgÀÄvÉÛ. £ÀªÀÄä d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß dAiÀÄgÁªÉÄÃUËqÀ£À PÀqɬÄAzÀ DvÀ£À C½AiÀÄ gÁdtÚ vÀ£Àß ªÀÄPÀ̽UÉ zÁ£À ªÀiÁrPÉÆlÖ ºÁUÉ zÁ£À ¥ÀvÀæ ªÀiÁr¹PÉÆArgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ £ÁªÀÅ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è zÁªÉ ºÀÆrzÀÄÝ, ºÁ° £ÁåAiÀÄ®AiÀÄzÀ°è N.J¸ï.£ÀA.404/2015 gÀ°è «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ°ègÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F §UÉÎ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 20 ¢£ÀUÀ¼À »AzÉ JA.«. gÁdtÚ £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉAiÀÄ §½UÉ AiÀiÁgÀ£ÉÆßà PÀ¼ÀÄ»¹ ¹«¯ï PÉøÀÄ gÁf ªÀiÁrPÉƼÀÄîªÀÅzÀPÉÌ ºÉý E®èzÉ EzÀÝgÉà ¥Àj¹Üw £ÉnÖVgÀĪÀÅ¢®èªÉAzÀÄ ºÉý CAvÀ ºÉý PÀ¼ÀÄ»¹zÀÝgÀÄ. »ÃVgÀĪÀ°è £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉAiÀĪÀgÀÄ gÁdtÚ vÀ£Àß ªÀÄPÀ̼À ºÉ¸ÀjUÉ ªÀiÁrPÉÆArgÀĪÀ d«ÄãÀ£À£ÀÄß ©lÄÖPÉÆqÀĪÀAvÉ PÉýzÀÝPÉÌ ¤Ã£ÀÄ ¨sÀÆ«Ä ªÉÄÃ¯É EgÀĪÀ §zÀ®Ä J°èUÁzÀgÀÆ ºÉÆÃV ¸Á» d«ÄãÀÄ ªÀiÁvÀæ ©qÀĪÀÅ¢®èªÉAzÀÄ ¥ÀzÉà ¥ÀzÉà £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉUÉ ºÉýwÛzÀÄÝ EzÉà «ZÁgÀzÀ°è £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉ £Á£ÀÄ ºÀt PÉÆlÖgÀÆ d«ÄãÀÄ ©qÀ°®èªÀ¯Áè CAvÀ ªÀiÁ£À¹PÀªÁV PÉÆgÀÄUÀÄwÛzÀÝgÀÄ. ¤£Éß ¢£ÁAPÀ 31.10.2022 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É¼ÀUÉÎ 7.00 UÀAmÉUÉ JA¢£ÀAvÉ ªÀģɬÄAzÀ PÉ®¸ÀPÉÌ - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 ºÉÆÃUÀĪÁUÀ ¨ÉÃeÁj£À°èzÀÝgÀÄ gÁwæ ªÀÄ£ÉUÉ §A¢gÀ°®è. £ÁªÀÅ gÁwæ PÉ®¸À EgÀ§ºÀÄzÀÄ ¨É¼ÀUÉÎ §gÀ§ºÀÄzÉAzÀÄ ¸ÀĪÀÄä¤zÉݪÀÅ. F ¢£À ¨É¼ÀUÉÎ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 7.30 UÀAmÉ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è £ÀªÀÄä aPÀÌ¥Àà ZÀ£ÉßÃUËqÀ ©£ï ¯ÉÃmï £ÀAeÉÃUËqÀ gÀªÀgÀ £ÀªÀÄä ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ §½ §AzÀÄ ±ÀAPÀgÉÃUËqÀ F »AzÉ £ÀªÀÄä ºÉ¸Àj£À°èzÀÝ ¸ÀªÉð £ÀA.53/5gÀ d«ÄãÀ£À°è AiÀiÁªÁUÀ®Æ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÆà PÁ¼ÀÄ ªÀiÁvÉæUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸Éë¹ ªÀÄÈvÀ¥ÀnÖgÀÄvÁÛ£ÉAzÀÄ w½¹zÁUÀ vÀPÀët £ÁªÀÅ ºÉÆÃV £ÉÆÃrzÁUÀ ¸ÀAUÀw ¤dªÁV £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉ £ÀªÀÄä UÁæªÀÄzÀ ¸ÀªÉð £ÀA.53/5gÀ d«Ää£À°è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÆà PÁ¼ÀÄ ªÀiÁvÉæAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸Éë¹ ¸ÀvÀÄÛ ©¢ÝzÀÝgÀÄ. CªÀgÀ eÉé£À°è MAzÀÄ aÃn EzÀÄÝ, CzÀgÀ°è JA.«.gÁdtÚ ¯ÁAiÀÄgï DVzÁÝ£É vÉÆÃlzÀ¥Àà ±ÀAPÀgÉÃUËqÀ JA§ÄªÀjUÉ §ºÀ¼À ªÉÆøÀ ªÀiÁrzÁÝ£É C¸À®Ä §rØAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÉÆnÖzÉÝÃªÉ PÀÄlÄA§ ºÁ¼ÀÄ ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛzÁÝ£É JgÀqÀÄ PÀÄlÄA§UÀ½UÉ £ÁåAiÀÄ PÉÆr¸À¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ EvÁå¢AiÀiÁV §gÉ¢gÀÄvÁÛ£É. £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉ ¤£Éß ¢£À ¢£ÁAPÀ 31.10.2022 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É¼ÀUÉÎ 7.30 UÀAmÉUÉ PÉ®¸ÀPÉÌ ºÉÆÃVzÀݪÀgÀÄ PÉ®¸À ªÀÄÄV¹PÉÆAqÀÄ ¸ÀAeÉ HjUÉ ªÁ¥À¸ï §AzÀªÀgÀÄ ªÀÄ£ÉUÉ ¨ÁgÀzÉà gÁwæ 8.30 UÀAmÉAiÀÄ £ÀAvÀgÀzÀ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÆà ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è JA.«.gÁdtÚ ¯ÉÃmï. «ÃgÀtÚ gÀªÀgÀÄ ªÀiÁ£À¹PÀ ZÀÄZÀÄÑ ªÀiÁvÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß Dr J¯ÁèzÀgÀÆ ºÉÆÃV ¸Á¬Ä ¤Ã£ÀÄ. ¤Ã£ÀÄ ¸ÀvÀÛgÉ d«Ää£À vÀAmÉ vÀPÀgÁgÀÄ vÀ¥ÀÄàvÀÛzÉ JAzÀÄ ¥ÀzÉà ¥ÀzÉà §½ ¸ÁAiÀÄ®Ä ¥ÉæÃgÉæ¸ÀÄwÛzÀÝjAzÀ EzÀjAzÀ £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉ ªÀÄ£À £ÉÆAzÀÄ £ÀªÀÄä UÁæªÀÄzÀ ¥ÀPÀÌzÀ°ègÀĪÀ ¸ÀªÉð £ÀA.53/5gÀ d«Ää£À §½ ºÉÆÃV AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÆà PÁ¼ÀÄ ªÀiÁvÉæUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÉêÀ£É ªÀiÁr ªÀÄÈvÀ ¥ÀnÖgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. £ÀªÀÄä vÀAzÉAiÀÄ ¸Á«UÉ JA.«.gÁdtÚgÀªÀgÉà PÁgÀtgÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. DzÀÝjAzÀ JA.«. gÁdtÚ gÀªÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸À®Ä PÉÆÃgÀÄvÉÛãÉ. ±ÀªÀªÀÅ ¸ÀܼÀzÀ°èAiÉÄà EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. vÁªÀÅ ¸ÀܼÀPÉÌ §AzÀÄ ªÀÄÄA¢£À PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸À®Ä PÉÆÃgÀÄvÉÛãÉ." 9. It is the case of the complainant, the son of the deceased, that the father had certain parcels of land which was subject matter of certain proceedings and about 4 or 5 years ago, the petitioner had transferred the lands to the names of his children and therefore, complainant alleges that his father - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 had been cheated. What is not stated in the complaint is that a plethora of civil proceedings are pending qua the subject land which was not instituted today, but have been pending from three decades. Be that as it may. 10. The further allegation in the case at hand through the complaint is that the petitioner has hurled abuse against the father of the complainant that he would not return the land and "go and die". Whether this would amount to abetment to suicide is what is necessary to be considered. Abetment to suicide at the relevant point in time under the IPC is dealt with under Section 306 of IPC. Section 306 of IPC reads as follows: “306. Abetment of suicide — If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.” Section 306 of IPC has its ingredients under Section 107 of IPC. Section 107 of IPC reads as follows: “107. Abetment of a thing.— A person abets the doing of a thing, who— First. — Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly.— 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 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.— Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing." Section 107 of the IPC deals with abetment of a thing. If the offence under Section 306 of the IPC has to be proved, the ingredients as obtaining under Section 107 of the IPC are necessarily to be present. They are goading, instigation, proximity to the crime and the victim not left with any other option but to commit suicide. The interpretation of Sections 306 and 107 of the IPC need not detain this Court for long or delve deep into the matter. The Apex Court in plethora of cases has considered the purport of Sections 306 and 107 of the IPC and has quashed those proceedings even at the initial stage on the reason that uttering words "go and die" would not become an abetment to suicide nor the civil transaction pending for ages and any act that is not proximate to the incident that has happened would become an offence under Section 306 of the IPC. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 10.1. The Apex Court, in the case of YADWINDER SINGH ALIAS SUNNY v. STATE OF PUNJAB1, has held as follows: “…. …. …. 15. By now the position of law insofar as abetment of suicide is concerned is well settled. Even if we accept the entire case put up by the prosecution as it is without adding anything or subtracting, we are of the view that none of the ingredients to constitute the offence of abetment punishable under Section 306 of the IPC are borne out. 16. This Court in the case of “Nipun Aneja v. State of Uttar Pradesh”, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 4091 has succinctly explained the Principles of law governing abetment. We quote the relevant observations as under:— “13. The law governing Section 306 of the IPC is well settled. Section 306 of the IPC reads as under:— “306. Abetment of suicide. —If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.” 14. Thus, the basic ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 306 of the IPC are suicidal death and abetment thereof. Abetment of a thing is defined under Section 107 of the IPC as under:— “107. Abetment of a thing.— A person abets the doing of a thing, who— First. — Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly.— 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 12025 SCC OnLine SC 2332 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.— 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. 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 facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.” 17. This Court in Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan, (2021) 19 SCC 144, after considering the provisions of Section 306 of the IPC along with the definition of abetment under Section 107 of the IPC, has observed as under:— “14. Section 306 of IPC makes abetment of suicide a criminal offence and prescribes punishment for the same. 15. The ordinary dictionary meaning of the word ‘instigate’ is to bring about or initiate, incite someone to do something. This Court in Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 1088, has defined the word ‘instigate’ as under: “20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do “an act”. 16. The scope and ambit of Section 107 IPC and its co-relation with Section 306 IPC has been discussed repeatedly by this Court. In the case of S.S. Cheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan (2010) 12 SCC 190 : (2011) 2 SCC (Cri) 465, it was observed 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 - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 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.” (emphasis supplied) 17. Thus, the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 306 of the IPC would stand fulfilled if the suicide is committed by the deceased due to direct and alarming encouragement/incitement by the accused leaving no option but to commit suicide. The act of instigation as alleged must be with the intention to push the deceased into such a situation that she is left with no other option but to commit suicide. 18. In the case on hand, even if we believe that the appellant due to opposition and pressure from his family declined to get married with the deceased, it could not be said that he led to a situation by which the deceased was left with no other option but to commit the suicide. The appellant could not be said to have intended the consequences of his act namely suicide. It is very sad to note that a young girl took the extreme step of ending her life. It is possible that she might have felt hurt. One sensitive moment took away the life of a young girl. However, as judges we should not allow our minds get boggled with such thoughts. We are obliged to decide the matter on the basis of the evidence on record. In other words whether the allegations levelled constitute any offence. Mere refusal to marry even if true by itself would not amount to instigation as explained under Section 107 of the IPC.” (Emphasis supplied) - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 10.2. A little earlier to the said judgment, the Apex Court, in the case of GEETA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA2, has held as follows: “…. …. …. 17. For the purpose of examining whether the ingredients of Section 306 are attracted, we take the prosecution case as it is. Taken at its highest, there is definitely evidence on record to show that over a period of few months the neighbours were at loggerheads. While the victim felt that her tuition classes were being disturbed, the appellant's family have also had a grievance about the victim and her family scolding the children of the appellant's household. There is no doubt that not only were there heated exchanges, but physical blows were also alleged to have been administered by the appellant's party. Insofar as delivering of physical blows are concerned, today the appellant stands acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 323. She stands acquitted even for the offences punishable under Section 504 and 506. The State has not preferred any appeal. 18. Even if we were to assume that physical blows were administered, will that per se constitute abetment to suicide? This Court in a case where the accused told the deceased “go and die” and when thereafter, the deceased committed suicide, absolved the accused of the charge under Section 306 by holding as under: “3. …Those words are casual nature which are often employed in the heat of the moment between quarrelling people. Nothing serious is expected to follow thereafter. The said act does not reflect the requisite mens rea on the assumption that these words would be carried out in all events. …” 22025 SCC OnLine SC 1938 - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 [Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of M.P., 1995 Supp (3) SCC 438] 19. This Court in Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat, (2010) 8 SCC 628, held that in order to bring out an offence under Section 306 IPC specific abetment as contemplated by Section 107 IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring about the suicide of the person concerned as a result of that abetment is required. It was further held that the intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for attracting Section 306. 20. In Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu v. State of West Bengal, (2010) 1 SCC 707, this Court held that the harassment meted out to the victim should have left the victim with no other alternative but to put an end to his/her life. 21. In M. Mohan v. State, (2011) 3 SCC 626, this Court followed the dictum in Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618, wherein it was held as under: “41. This Court in SCC para 20 of Ramesh Kumar has examined different shades of the meaning of “instigation”. Para 20 reads as under: (SCC p. 629) “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 - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.” In the said case this Court came to the conclusion that there is no evidence and material available on record wherefrom an inference of the appellant-accused having abetted commission of suicide by Seema (the appellant's wife therein) may necessarily be drawn.” Thereafter, this Court in Mohan (supra) held:— 45. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court are 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 this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he/she committed suicide.” 22. This Court in Mahendra Awase v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2025 INSC 76, after analyzing the long line of precedents held as under:— “18. As has been held hereinabove, to satisfy the requirement of instigation the accused by his act or omission or by a continued course of conduct should have created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide. It was also held that a word uttered in a fit of anger and emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.” 23. Applying the tests laid down hereinabove, we are not able to persuade ourselves to hold that when the appellant's family and the victim's family had heated exchanges, there was any intention to abet or to cause any member of either family to take their own life. These quarrels occur in everyday life, and on facts we are not able to conclude that there was an instigation on the part of the appellant to such an extent that the victim was left with no other option but to commit suicide.” (Emphasis supplied) - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 If the facts obtaining in the case at hand is considered on the bedrock of the elucidation of the law laid down by the Apex Court, what would unmistakably emerge is that the crime in the case at hand cannot even be permitted to be investigated into as the necessary ingredients that are necessary for an offence under Section 306 of the IPC are not present even to its semblance in the case at hand. Therefore, if investigation is permitted, it would become an abuse of the process of law and result in miscarriage of justice. Though a precious life is lost, it would not mean that the accused who has not committed those acts of the ingredients of the offence under Section 306 of IPC must be permitted to undergo the rigmarole of investigation or trial as the case would be. 11. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The criminal petition is allowed (ii) The crime in Crime No.268/2022 pending before the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Doddaballapura, - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7959 CRL.P No. 4514 of 2023 Bangalore Rural District for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC stands quashed qua the petitioner. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE PKS/List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2