LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

MAHENDRA AWASE versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation: [2025] 2 S.C.R. 80 · Decided: 16-01-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY S. OKA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 2 S.C.R. 80 : 2025 INSC 76
Mahendra Awase 
v. 
The State of Madhya Pradesh
(Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 2025)
17 January 2025
[Abhay S. Oka and K.V. Viswanathan,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in declining the prayer of the 
appellant to discharge him from the offences under Section 306, 
Penal Code, 1860.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 – s.306 – Abetment of suicide – Charges 
framed against the appellant u/s.306 – Appellant, if instigated 
the deceased to commit suicide:
Held: No – For conviction u/s.306, the person who is said to have 
abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active 
role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the 
commission of suicide – Such act of abetment must be proved and 
established by the prosecution – Further, 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 – 
Suicide note revealed that the appellant was asking the deceased 
to repay the loan guaranteed by the deceased and advanced to 
one ‘RM’ – Thus, the appellant by performing his duty of realising 
outstanding loans at the behest of his employer cannot be said to 
have instigated the deceased to commit suicide – Appellant did not 
intend to instigate the commission of suicide – It could certainly 
not be said that the appellant by his acts created circumstances 
which left the deceased with no other option except to commit 
suicide – The exchanges with the deceased, though heated, were 
not with the intent to leave him with no other option but to commit 
suicide – Also, the FIR was also lodged after a delay of two months 
and twenty days – There were no grounds to frame charges u/s.306 
against the appellant – Discharged – Proceedings quashed, set 
aside – Impugned order also set aside. [Paras 16, 19, 21]
* Author
[2025] 2 S.C.R. 
81
Mahendra Awase v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Penal Code, 1860 – s.306 – Abetment of suicide – Threshold to 
attract s.306 is higher – Charges not to be framed mechanically, 
Courts to be cautious – Police to be sensitised:
Held: s.306 is casually and too readily resorted to by the police – 
While the persons involved in genuine cases where the threshold 
is met should not be spared, the provision should not be deployed 
against individuals, only to assuage the immediate feelings 
of the distraught family of the deceased – The conduct of the 
proposed accused and the deceased, their interactions and 
conversations preceding the unfortunate death of the deceased 
should be approached from a practical point of view and not 
divorced from day-to-day realities of life – Hyperboles employed 
in exchanges should not, without anything more, be glorified as 
an instigation to commit suicide – Investigating agencies to be 
sensitised so that persons are not subjected to the abuse of 
process of a totally untenable prosecution  – Trial courts must 
also exercise great caution and circumspection and should not 
adopt a play it safe syndrome by mechanically framing charges, 
even when the investigating agencies have shown utter disregard 
for the ingredients of s.306 – Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 –  
ss.108, 45. [Para 20]
Penal Code, 1860 – ss.306, 107 – Ingredient of s.306 – When 
attracted – 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 SCR 437 : (2011) 3 SCC 
626; Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh [2001] Supp. 4 SCR 
247 : (2001) 9 SCC 618 – referred to.
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
List of Keywords
Section 306, Penal Code, 1860; Abetment of suicide; Instigation; 
Active role; Intention; Aid; Instigate; Abet; No other option except 
82
[2025] 2 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
to commit suicide; Loan; Realising outstanding loans; Ingredient 
of Section 306; Charge under Section 306, Penal Code, 1860; 
Discharged.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No.  
221 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.07.2023 of the High Court 
of Madhya Pradesh at Indore in CRR No. 1142 of 2023
Appearances for Parties
Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Ms. Anjale

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.