LexSHENBAGAVALLI AND ORS. versus THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 4 S.C.R. 2451 : 2025 INSC 607 Shenbagavalli and Ors. v. The Inspector of Police, Kancheepuram District and Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 4268 of 2024) 30 April 2025 [Abhay S. Oka and Augustine George Masih,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Appellants sought for quashing of the chargesheet submitted against them u/s.306 IPC. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – s.306 – Victim-deceased and accused no.7 got married on 15.09.2013 – Relationship deteriorated – It is alleged that on 10.11.2013 accused persons came to the residence of the victim and abused him and his family members with filthy language – Accused no.7 left with other accused persons to her parental house – Victim committed suicide on 09.12.2013 – Chargesheet filed against the appellants u/s.306 of IPC – Appellants sought quashing of same u/s.482 of CrPC before the High Court, which was dismissed – Correctness: Held: What turns out primarily from the sequence of events, statements and the suicide note is that from 11.11.2013 until the actual date of suicide i.e. 09.12.2013 there has been no contact whatsoever either in person or by phone or any other means between the deceased or his relatives and his wife or any of the other accused which would indicate continuous harassment or torture or any sort of pressure at the hands of the accused appellants on the deceased – Therefore, there is no proximity of any harassment or instigation prior to the incident of suicide having taken place – Otherwise also the contents of the FIR do not in itself indicate any active or direct act which can be said to have led the deceased to commit suicide leaving him no option but to push the deceased into a position that he committed suicide – From the suicide note, no abetment can be said to have been established that the accused instigated the deceased or there being any persistent cruelty or harassment which would make out an offence of abetment of suicide – Merely on the basis of the allegations of harassment * Author 2452 [2025] 4 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports and that too a month ago with in between there being no contact of any sort on the part of the appellants, till the time of occurrence which can be said to have led or compelled the deceased to have committed suicide, the offence has not been made out – With the very element of abetment conspicuously absent from the allegations made in the FIR which is primarily based upon the suicide note, the essential requirements for constituting an offence u/s.306 IPC remain unfulfilled – As such, the continuation of the criminal proceedings initiated against the appellants would amount to an abuse of the process of law. [Paras 14, 17] Case Law Cited Ude Singh and Others v. State of Haryana [2019] 9 SCR 703 : (2019) 17 SCC 301 – relied on. Mahendra Singh and Another Gayatribai v. State of M.P. (1995) Supp. 3 SCC 731; S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan and Another [2010] 9 SCR 1111 : (2010) 12 SCC 190; Netai Dutta v. State of W.B. (2005) 2 SCC 659; Mohit Singhal and Another v. State of Uttarakhand and Others (2024) 1 SCC 417; Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu v. State of West Bengal [2009] 15 SCR 836 : (2010) 1 SCC 707; M. Arjunan v. State represented by its inspector of Police (2019) 3 SCC 315; Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan and Another [2021] 10 SCR 393 : (2021) 19 SCC 144 – referred to. List of Acts Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. List of Keywords Section 306 of Penal Code, 1860; Matrimonial dispute; Harassment; Suicide; Abetment; Aid; Instigate; Abetment to suicide; Abuse of the process of law; Suicide note. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 4268 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 13.04.2018 of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in CROP No. 3278 of 2016 With Criminal Appeal No. 4269 of 2024 [2025] 4 S.C.R. 2453 Shenbagavalli And Ors. v. The Inspector of Police, Kancheepuram District and Anr. Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellants: Ms. Rebecca John, Ms. Rachana Srivastava, Sr. Advs., John Mathew, Mrs. Mona K. Rajvanshi, Ms. Monika, Anurag Kashyap. Advs. for the Respondents: V Krishnamurthy, Sr. A.A.G., D.Kumanan, Ms. Deepa S, Sheikh F Kalia, Ms. Azka Sheikh Kalia, Veshal Tyagi, Chinmay Anand Panigrahi. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Augustine George Masih, J. 1. These two criminal appeals have been preferred against judgment dated 13.04.2018, passed by the Single Judge of the Madras High C
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.