Abetment of suicide charge can stand on prima facie material showing instigation at the framing stage

For framing a charge of abetment of suicide, the court must see whether the materials, taken at face value, disclose grounds to presume instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding under Section 107 IPC; it is not required to decide whether conviction is ultimately likely. Applying that limited test, the material including the suicide note and investigation statements indicated pressure in connection with business transactions and share settlement, which was sufficient to support an inference of instigation at the charge stage. The charge under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC was therefore upheld, and interference in revision was declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether the material on record disclosed a prima facie case of abetment of suicide under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 so as to justify framing of charge and refusal to interfere in revision.

Analysis: To attract Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the prosecution must show that the deceased committed suicide and that the accused abetted the suicide within the meaning of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Abetment requires instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding, and instigation involves conduct that goads, urges, provokes, or encourages the deceased to take the extreme step, with mens rea. At the stage of framing charge, the court is to see whether the materials, taken at face value, disclose grounds for presuming commission of the offence and may sift the evidence only for that limited purpose. On the material collected, including the suicide note and statements recorded in investigation, the deceased appeared to have been subjected to pressure in relation to business transactions and share settlement, and the trial court was justified in drawing an inference of instigation for the limited purpose of charge.

Conclusion: The charge under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was rightly framed and the High Court correctly declined interference in revision.

Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of framing charge, if the material on record, accepted at face value, makes commission of the offence a probable consequence and discloses grounds for presuming instigation or other forms of abetment, the court may frame charge for abetment of suicide and need not assess whether conviction is ultimately likely.

---