Introduction
The Supreme Court of India recently quashed an FIR registered under Indian Penal Code Section 306 (abetment of suicide), finding that a man’s withdrawal from a proposed marriage, the sole act relied upon, did not amount to instigation under Section 107 IPC. The court reaffirmed the principle that emotional distress alone does not convert a broken engagement into a criminal offence.
Facts of the Case
In the case of Yadwinder Singh @ Sunny v. State of Punjab & Anr., the deceased, a woman engaged in correspondence with the petitioner, alleged that he agreed to marry her but later reneged. Following the alleged broken promise, the woman reportedly consumed poison and died. The FIR was registered in 2016 by her mother under Section 306 IPC, on the ground that the petitioner had “betrayed” her by backing out of the marriage while she had trusted his promise.
What the Court Says
A Bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan held that even accepting the prosecution’s version in full, the essential ingredients of instigation under Section 107 IPC were absent. The court emphasised that abetment of suicide under Section 306 requires a “direct and alarming encouragement/incitement” or active aiding that leaves the victim with no viable option but to end her life.
It observed that while the woman may have been hurt or disappointed by the engagement’s collapse, that emotional hurt does not equate to criminal instigation. The evidence did not record a positive act or intimation compelling her to take the extreme step of suicide.
Implications
This ruling clarifies a critical point in criminal jurisprudence relating to abetment of suicide. It holds that:
- A broken promise of marriage or withdrawal from an engagement alone does not automatically amount to instigation under Section 107 IPC.
- Investigative agencies and courts must look for concrete evidence of direct encouragement, inducement, coercion or aiding of the suicide act, not merely emotional betrayal.
- It reinforces the requirement of a causal link between the accused’s conduct and the victim’s act of suicide. The absence of such a link makes prosecution under Section 306 unsustainable.
In practical terms, this decision will impact how complaints of this nature are investigated and prosecuted. Law enforcement must ensure they gather and evaluate evidence of active instigation or assistance, rather than relying solely on emotional or matrimonial disappointment. Legal practitioners should advise clients accordingly, recognising that civil remedies (such as breach of promise or engagement) remain separate from criminal liability for suicide abetment.
For any specific query call at +91 – 8569843472
Conclusion
In the case of Yadwinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr., the Supreme Court reaffirmed the legal principle that the offence of abetment of suicide requires more than mere refusal to marry, it demands an active instigation or aid. The decision sends a strong message: emotional distress or broken matrimonial promises, while legally significant in other forums, do not automatically trigger criminal liability under Section 107 or Section 306 IPC.
