AYYUB & ORS. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

Citation: [2025] 2 S.C.R. 452 · Decided: 06-02-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJIV KHANNA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 2 S.C.R. 452 : 2025 INSC 168
Ayyub & Ors. 
v. 
State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
(Criminal Appeal No. 461 of 2025)
07 February 2025
[Sanjiv Khanna, CJI, Sanjay Kumar and  
K.V. Viswanathan,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order of High Court 
declining to quash the proceedings against the appellants u/s.306, 
Penal Code, 1860.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 – s.306 – Abetment of suicide – When 
not – FIR filed by first appellant-father of ‘Z’ against family 
of ‘T’ alleging that on suspicion of his relationship with ‘T’ 
they had beaten ‘Z’ with sticks and fists as a result of which 
he died  – R-2 (cousin brother of ‘T’) filed FIR against the 
appellants for abetment of suicide of ‘T’ alleging that through 
verbal utterances they humiliated and tortured ‘T’ and she 
committed suicide – Offence u/s.306, if made out against the 
appellants:
Held: No – None of the ingredients required to make out a 
case u/s.306 is even remotely mentioned in the charge-sheet or 
borne out from the material on record – There is only one sided 
version of the complainant-R-2– Charge-sheet proceeded in 
an unidimensional manner by accepting the version of R-2 and 
his family members as the gospel truth – Even if the utterance 
attributed to the appellants is assumed to be true it cannot be 
said to be of such a nature as to leave the deceased with no 
other alternative but to put an end to her life – No investigation 
was done to explore any other angle – The prior lodging of the 
FIR by the first appellant against the family of ‘T’ for the death 
of his son ‘Z’ indicates an element of desperation on the part 
of R-2 to somehow implicate the appellants – Reliance of the 
* Author
[2025] 2 S.C.R. 
453
Ayyub & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
statements u/s.161, CrPC belatedly also reinforces the suspicion 
of one-sided, partial and inimical investigation– Reinvestigation 
directed – Proceedings against the appellants quashed. [Paras 
15, 16, 21, 22, 24]
Penal Code, 1860 – ss.306, 107 – Ingredients of s.306 – 
Discussed.
Case Law Cited
Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of M.P. and Another (1995) Supp. 3 
SCC 438; Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat and Another, 
[2010] 10 SCR 351 : (2010) 8 SCC 628; Amalendu Pal alias 
Jhantu v. State of West Bengal [2009] 15 SCR 836 : (2010) 1 
SCC 707; M. Mohan v. State (2011) 3 SCC 626; Ramesh Kumar 
v. State of Chhattisgarh [2001] Supp. 4 SCR 247 : (2001) 9 
SCC 618; Mahendra Awase v. The State of Madhya Pradesh,  
2025 INSC 76 – referred to.
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
List of Keywords
Section 306 of Penal Code, 1860; Abetment of Suicide; Ingredients 
of Section 306 of Penal Code, 1860; Incitement to commit suicide; 
Intention; Aid or instigate or abet; Suspected Relationship; Verbal 
utterances; Insult; Humiliated; Tortured; Alleged harassment; No 
other alternative; ‘go and die’; Quashing; One-sided, partial and 
inimical investigation; Reinvestigation; Unnatural Death.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
461 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 27.07.2023 of the High Court 
of Judicature at Allahabad in A482 No. 45969 of 2023
Appearances for Parties
Bhuwan Raj, Ms. Manju Savita, Ms. Kiran Dhawan, Raman Singh, 
Advs. for the Appellants.
454
[2025] 2 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
Vishwa Pal Singh, Ms. Preeti Goel, Dhawal Uniyal, Ashutosh 
Bhardwaj, Mukesh Kumar, Prateek Rai, Divyesh Pratap Singh, 
Amit Sangwan, Ashu Bhindwar, Ms. Sneha Chandna, Varun Singh, 
Vikram Pratap Singh, Advs. for the Respondents.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
K.V. Viswanathan, J.
1.	
The present criminal appeal calls in question the correctness of the 
order dated 27.07.2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature 
at Allahabad in Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 25969 
of 2023. By the said order, the High Court declined to quash the 
proceedings instituted against the appellants under Section 306 of 
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’). 
2.	
The facts of the case are rather unfortunate. It has its origin in a 
suspected relationship between the son of the first appellant, one 
Ziaul Rahman (since deceased) and Tanu (since deceased), the 
cousin sister of respondent no. 2. 
3.	
On 02.11.2022 at 19:15 hrs, the first appellant Ayyub lodged a 
first information report alleging that Bhuru @ Janeshwar (relative 
of deceased Tanu), Maneshwar Saini (father of deceased T
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.