Gujarat High Court
Shaukatali Javarali Saiyed vs State Of Gujarat on 29 July, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 23548 of 2022
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 637 of 2023
With
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR VACATING INTERIM RELIEF) NO.
1 of 2024
In R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 637 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No

==========================================================
SHAUKATALI JAVARALI SAIYED & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRATIK B BAROT(3711) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR MB GOHIL(2702) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. ROHAN SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 29/07/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The petitioners have preferred these petitions under Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash and set aside
the FIR being C.R. No.11192008220352 of 2022 lodged before the
Bavla Police Station, District: Ahmedabad Rural, dated 07.12.2022,
for the offences punishable under Section 306, 506(2) and 114 of the
Indian Penal Code and consequential proceedings arising out of it.
Page 1 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
Brief facts as narrated in the FIR are as follows:
2. Respondent No.2 as in capacity of brother of the deceased in
nutshell comes up with a case inter-alia alleging that deceased
Aniruddhsinh was married with Prakashba, since year 2004-2005 so
therefore she along with their daughter left deceased and started
residing at her parental house and as a resultant effect of such
marital discord, it is alleged that original accused Nos.2 to 4 who are
family members of original accused No.1, and several litigations to
be filed by original accused No.1 against her husband (deceased), in
which, the accused No.5 and 6 having acted in capacity of advocates
representing original accused No.1 in such litigations in a way and in
company of original accused Nos.1 to 4 have time and again on
different dates compelled the deceased to be roped in other cases as
also issuance of arrest and non-bailable warrant be issued against the
deceased, so therefore, under the pretext that the deceased will be
roped in cases filed against him at the instance of his wife, deceased
parted with an amount of Rs.39,000/- in total to the accused Nos.5
and 6, for which, physical mental and financial harassment was
caused to deceased leading to his commission of suicide by
consuming some infectious tablets.
Whereas the suicide note reads as follows:
3. Aniruddhsinh Ranchhodbhai @ Ranjitsinh, thereby stated that
his wife Prakashba, while residing with him at my house bearing No.
72, Vallabhnagar Society, Bavla, in the year 2004, used to quarrelPage 2 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
over petty matters without any reason and used to say, “I do not like
you. I do not want to continue married life with you. I am not
comfortable with you. Do not make any demand for physical
pleasure from me.” After quarreling with him and without informing
him, she went to her parental home and, despite his repeatedly
asking her till this day, she has not returned.
3.1. Thereafter, many years later, in the year 2017, at the instance
of her father Balwantsang and Kiritsinh, she filed many cases of
domestic violence against him, harassed him and threatened him,
committed the act of extorting money from him and compelled him
to die.
3.2. In this regard, in collusion with the Advocate Mr. S. J. Saiyed
of Dholka, they created false evidence and filed false cases against
him in the Courts at Khambhat, Anand and Dholka. Even till this
day, they have produced evidence and have continued to harass him
physically, mentally and financially. They have threatened him and
compelled him to die.
3.3. The main persons who played a major role in this conspiracy
were his wife Prakashba, her father Balwantsang, her brother
Kiritsinh, her uncle’s son Mahipalsinh Bhagwatsinh and Advocate
Mr. S. J. Saiyed of Dholka and his son Saif Ali. These persons
harassed him and compelled him to die.
Page 3 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
3.4. Prakash said, “I am not your wife. I will not stay with you. I
am not going to come home. Do not keep any hope.” She used to
threaten him. Her father used to threaten to kill him and he would
stop him on the road when he used to go to Khambhat.
3.5. Although there is no house in the name of Mahipalsinh at
Golaya, false rent agreement has been produced before the Court in
his name.
3.6. Kiritsinh and Mahipalsinh would stop him on the road
whenever he used to go to Khambhat and threaten to kill him. The
main mastermind behind all these acts was Advocate Mr. S. J.
Saiyed of Dholka, his son and Balwansinh. By creating fabricated
evidence against him, they filed false cases of domestic violence,
maintenance and land disputes against him and subjected him to
mental torture. Advocate Mr. Saiyed got his wife to put signatures
and, by filing different cases repeatedly, used to demand money
from him. On one occasion, on the date of hearing in the Dholka
Court, he forcibly took Rs.10,000/- from him. During the dates of
hearing before the Khambhat Court also, he repeatedly demanded
money and by threatening to file false cases, extorted Rs.9,000/-
from him on one occasion. Further, on the date of hearing on
25.10.2021 also, he called him outside the Court and stated that he
would send the papers, get a warrant issued against him and have
him arrested and threatened him with proceedings in the High Court
Page 4 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
and thereby, extorted Rs.20,000/- from him. By threatening to
implicate him in false cases all the way to the High Court and the
Supreme Court, he demanded Rs.5,00,000/- from him. He has also
come to know that his wife and Advocate Saiyed had a 50-50%
partnership and intended to extort a large amount from him.
3.7. All the aforesaid persons, by making every kind of false
allegation, producing false evidence, fabricating facts and using
illegal means and methods, have, with the intention of extorting a
large amount from him, compelled him to die and for the last four
years, they had been harassing him immensely. As a result thereof,
owing to the mental, physical and financial effects suffered by him,
they have compelled him to die.
3.8. If his death occurs due to all these circumstances, persons
namely (1) Prakashba Balwantsang, (2) Balwantsang Halubhai, (3)
Kiritsinh Balwantsang, (4) Mahipalsinh Bhagvatsinh and (5)
Advocates S. J. Saiyed and Saif Ali S. Saiyed should be held
responsible and be awarded the strictest punishment in accordance
with the provisions of law. Until then, his dead body should not be
cremated.
3.9. He is writing the above facts himself in his own handwriting,
which should be treated as his dying declaration.
Page 5 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
Parties to the Petitions:
4. Petitioners in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 23548
of 2022 are advocates, whereas Petitioners in Criminal
Miscellaneous Application No. 637 of 2023, namely, petitioner No.1
is wife of the deceased, petitioner No.2 is father-in-law of the
deceased, petitioner No.3 is real brother of petitioner No.1 and
petitioner No.4 is cousin brother of petitioner No.1.
Submissions on behalf of petitioners:
5. Learned advocate Mr. Pratik Barot with regards to the
petitioners in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.23548 of 2022
would submit that the petitioners who are projected as advocates, a
father and a son duo appearing in various litigations as on behalf and
at the instance of wife of the deceased (original accused No.1) in
Courts at Khambhat, Anand and Dholka as alleged in the
introductory portion of the impugned FIR, a vague assertion as to
petitioners in company of original accused Nos.2 to 4 used to harass
the deceased under such pretext as also an allegation to the effect
that Rs.39,000/- in total at different occasions demanded from the
deceased by the petitioners or else, he will be roped in cases after
cases in a Court of law, the present petitioners as advocates and
professionals in good faith appearing for their clients and raising
various claims in an individual litigations filed by them an the
petitioners as advocates had no reason to compel the deceased to
shell out money in all such litigations pending and filed against him
Page 6 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
nor they had any personal interest in any of such litigations pending
between the parties, but it is only upon the insistence of the Court
concerned that out of some legal direction or judicial order, a party is
required to comply the order in its true spirit and essence, that too,
upon instructions passed on from original accused Nos.1 to 4, they
are performing their duty stepping into a shoes of an advocate given
all authority in Vakalatnama itself to appear for them in all such
litigations filed at various Courts seeking multiple release of
substantive nature and to make good their case in all such litigations,
one would not intend or had mens rea to see to it that as on account
of claims raised against persons like deceased, they are actually
inviting trouble for themselves as like present case where deceased
had resorted to commission of suicide and the petitioners are now
blamed for such commission of so-called suicide and to say that the
petitioners as advocates also helped original accused Nos.1 to 4 in
any manner achieving their expected outcome in each and every
litigation they appear or in a way compelled or abetted the
commission of suicide by the deceased. As far as an amount of
Rs.39,000/- talked about in the impugned FIR as allegedly
demanded by the petitioners at different intervals and at different
occasions, it is so vague and a general allegation leveled against the
petitioners to which no proof is attached with the impugned FIR in
order to substantiate the case of demand of money but only so as to
malign the reputation and status of the petitioners as advocates
appearing for the wife and deceased was under constant and
Page 7 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
tremendous pressure to respond in each of such litigations filed
against him, their names are given as accused persons with no fault
on their part as can be seen from various litigations and their
bonafide appearing for the wife of the deceased in some of such
litigations and a moral and ethical duty they have towards their
client.
5.1. Learned advocate would further submit that apart from
petitioners being advocates practicing at Dholka and nature of
allegations leveled against them in their individual capacity, to utter
surprise for deceased having succumbed to death on 11.12.2021 by
consuming infectious tablets initially, only an accidental death entry
stood registered as accidental death entry No.38 of 2021 lodged
under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, but
subsequently because a suicide note-cum-chit was recovered from
the bed of the deceased post his death, there are perhaps names of
the petitioners also figuring on such suicide note, on the strength of
suicide note-cum-chit the impugned FIR is sought to be registered
against the petitioners with a collective cry that original accused
Nos.1 to 4 as family members of the deceased in company and
support of present petitioners have been responsible in harassing the
deceased by dragging him into several litigations lodged against him
which unfortunately as on account of such litigations pending
against him and some illness suffered, he has expired and for which
and for the said action of his, way back on 11.12.2021, accidental
Page 8 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
death investigation went on for almost a year and now the impugned
FIR is registered on 07.12.2022 with no justifiable reason as to why
there was a need to lodge the impugned FIR inasmuch as suicide
note chit, Investigating Agency already have in their possession as
on 11.12.2021 what took so long to come to a conclusion that FIR is
to be registered against the family members as also the advocates
appearing for them, the said unexplained delay both at the end of
original first informant and Investigating Agency in registering the
impugned FIR as in facts and circumstances of the present case fatal
to the prosecution.
5.2. He would further submit that postmortem note of the deceased
as procured under Right to Information Act, dated 11.12.2021, is
concerned as against theory of deceased having consumed infectious
tablets if cause of death in column No.23 is perused, it is on account
of cardiopulmonary arrest due to brain and lung edema wherein no
traces of poison is detected either in the blood, piece of liver, spline,
each kidney and stomach ruling out every possibility of it being a
suicidal death and a condition precedent to register a case under
Section 306 of the IPC against an accused, failing which, accused
even need not answer the factum of abetment to suicide as held by
Honourable the Apex Court in catena of judgment and resultantly it
would only remain as either an accidental death or a natural death, to
which, the petitioners are not answerable to countenance any other
alternative theories leading to the death of the deceased. There are
Page 9 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
other decisions of Honourable the Apex Court in a 482 Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 jurisdiction explaining as to what could be
said to be an abetment at the instance of the accused answering the
factum of the suicidal death, worse-cum-worse, even if at this stage,
suicidal death is assumed, the present petitioners being advocates
appearing for their clients including the essentially the wife of the
deceased in several litigations lodged against the deceased for their
bonafide action exercise in good faith and performing their legal,
moral and ethical duty, no way make them liable as accused persons,
even if persons like deceased resorts to commission of suicide with a
vague and general allegation leveled against the petitioners of they
remained instrumental in pushing the deceased to face all such
litigations and/or shell out money in favour of his wife which is now
given a shape as if the petitioners as his advocates were demanding
the money from the deceased to satisfy their financial needs and not
acting on behalf of his wife, which according to the petitioners is not
abetment in eyes of law and they are identical went off before
Honourable the Apex Court wherein question of abetment is
discussed, explained and answered in detail, so as to countenance the
aspect of cases abetment alone.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Pratik Barot with regards to petitioners
in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.637 of 2023 would
submit that the present petitioners who are wife, father-in-law,
brother-in-law and cousin brother-in-law and a suicide note is left
Page 10 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
behind naming and referring them as persons responsible for the
suicide of the deceased. In this regard, the learned advocate drawing
attention of this Court would submit that petitioner No.1 left
deceased in the year 2004 and had returned back to her parental
house so also there was no occasion ever for her to come back to
deceased till he resorted to commission of suicide as stated in the
impugned FIR, whereas there are very general household allegations
leveled against petitioner No.1, which by imagination can be said to
be providing an abetment to the deceased to resort to commission of
suicide, that too, in an interval of 17 years, in which, the petitioner
had no occasion to come back to the deceased. As far as petitioners
Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, who are father-in-law and brother-in-law
of the deceased, against them, there is an allegation of filing various
litigations against the deceased and compelling him to succumb to
their demands with the support of the advocates concerned who
helped them in filing certain litigations against the deceased at
Khambhat, Anand and Dholka Courts. As regard allegations against
petitioner No.4 who is cousin brother-in-law of the deceased, there is
a collective cry of the deceased against all the petitioners as family
members and two advocates of they having compelled, harassed and
creating circumstances for the deceased, for which, he was left with
no other option but to commit suicide. There are allegations made
against petitioner No.2 as to he having threatened the deceased to
death as also whenever deceased had a date to be attended at
Khambhat Court, petitioner Nos.3 and 4 used to threatened him. In
Page 11 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
nutshell, what is alleged is that on the strength of the litigations filed
by petitioner No.1, attempt was made to extort money from the
deceased and put him under the compelling circumstances to
succumb to the harassment caused, which in humble submission,
filing of various litigations by petitioner No.1 as in capacity of wife
deriving some support from petitioner Nos.2 to 4 as her relatives in a
course of law, is a statutory legal right given and available to
petitioner No.1, for which, such action of the wife against deceased
claiming certain reliefs under different headings no way can be said
to be an abetment in the eyes of law, and if at all, deceased commits
suicide, no blame can be shifted upon petitioner No.1 or her relatives
by making them answer for the offence under Section 306 of the
IPC.
6.1. Learned advocate would further submit that apart from what is
being contended by the present petitioners standing in the shoes of
wife, father-in-law, brother-in-law and cousin brother-in-law as
against invocation of Section 306 of the IPC, to utter surprise for
deceased having succumbed to death on 11.12.2021 by consuming
infectious tablets initially only an accidental death entry stood
registered as accidental death entry No.38 of 2021 lodged under
Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 but
subsequently because a suicide note-cum-chit was recovered from
the bed of the deceased post his death, there are perhaps names of
the petitioners also figuring on such suicide note, on the strength of
Page 12 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
suicide note-cum-chit the impugned FIR is sought to be registered
against the petitioners with a collective cry that the petitioners as
family members of the deceased in company and support of the
advocates i.e. original accused Nos.5 and 6 have been responsible in
harassing the deceased by dragging him into several litigations
lodged against him which unfortunately as on account of such
litigations pending against him and some illness suffered, he has
expired and for which and for the said action of his, way back on
11.12.2021. Reiterating the arguments of Criminal Miscellaneous
Application No.23548 of 2022, learned advocate for the petitioners
prayed to allow the present petitions.
Joint submission on behalf of Respondent No.1 – State and
Respondent No.2 – original complainant.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Rohan Shah for the
respondent – State and learned advocate Mr. M. B. Gohil for the
respondent No.2 – original complainant would submit that there is
no delay in lodging the FIR inasmuch as the accidental death
alongwith the suicide note was immediately informed to the police.
They would further submit that from the reading of the suicide note
itself, would make out a strong prima facie case against the
petitioners, inasmuch as whether the allegations leveled in the
suicide note would be sustained or not can only be decided after a
full fledged trial, and thus, brushing aside the allegations at the very
Page 13 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
nascent stage of the investigation, that too also at the stage of
quashing of the FIR, is not permissible.
7.1. Learned advocate Mr. Gohil would also submit that the suicide
note which was found under the pillow of the victim as it was
written by the deceased himself having his own handwriting and
signature, this suicide note and other papers to police for
investigation which was collected by the I.O. and sent by them to
FSL in order to get it checked whether the suicide note is written by
the deceased or not, the sample of victim’s natural signature was
obtained and sent to FSL for confirmation, after which the suicide
note and the samples were checked by FSL. It was found that suicide
note was written by the deceased himself. Suicide note is comprised
of all the names who are responsible for his suicide, as name of the
all the petitioners are mentioned in it.
7.2. Learned advocate would further submit that petitioners abetted
the deceased to commit suicide by extorting money causing
harassment and threatening deceased. All the petitioners have played
the main part in this conspiracy encouraging deceased to commit
suicide. The petitioners are history seater / habitual offenders with
similar nature of criminal complaints pending against them and also
involved in numerous other illegal activities by producing forge and
fabricated documents for which another complaint is also registered
against them before Khambhat (Rural) Police Station at Anand vide
Page 14 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
FIR No.11215013220038 of 2022 dated 01.02.2022 under Section
465, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 114 of IPC.
7.3. Learned advocate Mr. Gohil would also submit that the
petitioners are adopting modus operandi as they are also habitual
towards an act of land grabbing. The complaint before District
Collector at Anand is filed against the petitioners on 08.04.2021 vide
Inward No. 10245. The wife had filed a frivolous case against the
deceased and his family members under Sections 12 of Domestic
Violence Act, 2005 being Criminal Misc. Application No.113 of
2017 filed before the Court of JMFC at Khambhat on 29.05.2017.
The wife had also filed maintenance proceedings under Section 125
of Cr.PC, before the JMFC, Khambhat. The wife had also filed
frivolous case against the deceased bearing Criminal Revision
Application No. 18 of 2018 filed before the District and Session
Court at Anand under Section 397 of the Cr.PC, dated 02.02.2018.
That, the wife had also false case against the deceased which is
being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 191 of 2019 before
the JMFC at Khambhat under Section 125(3) of CrPC. That, they
have also initiated appeal proceedings against the deceased bearing
Criminal Misc. Application No. 234 of 2019 filed before the Ld.
Addl. District & Sessions Judge at Anand under Section 29 of the
Domestic Violence Act, 2005. And lastly the petitioners had also
filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the
deceased bearing Civil Suit No.22 of 2020, before the Additional
Page 15 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
Senior Civil Judge at Dholka, Ahmedabad.
7.4. Hence, learned advocate would submit that this Court should
not conduct a mini trial while deciding a quashing petition and when
the statements from the investigation carried out till date and reading
of the suicide note makes out a prima facie case, this Court should
reject the present petitions.
8. At the outset, the law governing Sections 306 and 107 of the
IPC, it is apt to referred the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the case of Geo Varghese vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in AIR
2021 SC 4764, wherein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed
and held as under:
“13. In our country, while suicide in itself is not an offence as
person committing suicide goes beyond the reach of law but an
attempt to suicide is considered to be an offence under Section
309 IPC. The abetment of suicide by anybody is also an
offence under Section 306 IPC. It would be relevant to set out
Section 306 of the IPC which reads as under :-
“306.Abetment of suicide. If any person commits
suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide,
shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years,
and shall also be liable to fine.”
14. Though, the IPC does not define the word ‘Suicide’ but
the ordinary dictionary meaning of suicide is ‘self-killing’. The
word is derived from a modern latin word ‘suicidium’ ‘sui’
means ‘oneself’ and ‘cidium’ means ‘killing’. Thus, the word
Page 16 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
suicide implies an act of ‘self-killing’. In other words, act of
death must be committed by the deceased himself, irrespective
of the means adopted by him in achieving the object of killing
himself.
15. Section 306 of IPC makes abetment of suicide a criminal
offence and prescribes punishment for the same. Abetment is
defined under Section 107 of IPC which reads as under :-
“107.Abetment of a thing A person abets the doing of a
thing, who –
First. – Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly. – Engages with one or more other person or
persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if
an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of
that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing;
or
Thirdly. – Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal
omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1. – A person who, by wilful
misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a
material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily
causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a
thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that
thing.
Explanation 2. – Whoever either prior to or at the time of
the commission of an act, does anything in order to
facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby
facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the
doing of that act.”
16. The ordinary dictionary meaning of the word ‘instigate’
is to bring about or initiate, incite someone to do something.
This Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of
Chhattisghar has defined the word ‘instigate’ as under :-
“Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or
Page 17 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
encourage to do an act.”
17. The scope and ambit of Section 107 IPC and its co-
relation with Section 306 IPC has been discussed repeatedly
by this Court. In the case of S.S.Cheena Vs. Vijay Kumar
Mahajan and Anr.2, it was observed as under:-
“Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a
person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a
thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused
to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction
cannot be sustained. The intention of the legislature and
the ratio of the cases decided by the Supreme Court is
clear that in order to convict person under Section 306
IPC there has to be clear mens rea to commit the
offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which
led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and
that act must have been intended to push the deceased
into such a position that he committed suicide.”
18. In a recent pronouncement, a two-Judge Bench of this
Court in the case of Arnab Manoranjan Goswami Vs. State of
Maharashtra & Ors.3, while considering the co-relation of
Section 107 IPC with Section 306 IPC has observed as
under :-
“47. The above decision thus arose in a situation where
the High Court had declined to entertain a petition for
quashing an FIR under Section 482 of the 14 (2014) 4
SCC 453 PART I 33 CrPC. However, it nonetheless
directed the investigating agency not to arrest the
accused during the pendency of the investigation. This
was held to be impermissible by this Court. On the other
hand, this Court clarified that the High Court if it thinks
fit, having regard to the parameters for quashing and
self the restraint imposed by law, has the jurisdiction to
quash the investigation – and may pass appropriatePage 18 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
interim orders as thought apposite in law. Clearly
therefore, the High Court in present case has
misdirected itself in declining to enquire prima facie on
a petition for quashing whether the parameters in the
exercise of that jurisdiction have been duly established
and if so whether a case for the grant of interim bail has
been made out. The settled principles which have been
consistently reiterated since the judgment of this Court
in State of Haryana vs Bhajan Lal (Bhajan Lal) include
a situation where the allegations made in the FIR or the
complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and
accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute
any offence or make out a case against the accused. This
legal position was recently reiterated in a decision by a
two-judge Bench of this Court in Kamal Shivaji
Pokarnekar vs State of Maharashtra.
48. The striking aspect of the impugned judgment of
the High Court spanning over fifty-six pages is the
absence of any evaluation even prima facie of the most
basic issue. The High Court, in other words, failed to
apply its mind to a 15 1992 Supp. 1 SCC 335 16 (2019)
14 SCC 350 PART I 34 fundamental issue which needed
to be considered while dealing with a petition for
quashing under Article 226 of the Constitution or
Section 482 of the CrPC. The High Court, by its
judgment dated 9 November 2020, has instead allowed
the petition for quashing to stand over for hearing a
month later, and therefore declined to allow the
appellant’s prayer for interim bail and relegated him to
the remedy under Section 439 of the CrPC. In the
meantime, liberty has been the casualty. The High Court
having failed to evaluate prima facie whether the
allegations in the FIR, taken as they stand, bring thePage 19 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
case within the fold of Section 306 read with Section 34
of the IPC, this Court is now called upon to perform the
task.”
19. In the case of M. Arjunan Vs. State, Represented by its
Inspector of Police, a two-Judge Bench of this Court has
expounded the ingredients of Section 306 IPC in the following
words:-
“The essential ingredients of the offence under Section
306 I.P.C. are: (i) the abetment; (ii) the intention of the
accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to
commit suicide. The act of the accused, however,
insulting the deceased by using abusive language will
not, by itself, constitute the abetment of suicide. There
should be evidence capable of suggesting that the
accused intended by such act to instigate the deceased to
commit suicide. Unless the ingredients of
instigation/abetment to commit suicide are satisfied,
accused cannot be convicted under Section 306 I.P.C.”
xxx xxx xxx
23. In the backdrop of the above discussion, we may
now advert to the facts of the present case to test
whether the ingredients of offence under Section 306
IPC exist, even prima-facie, to continue with the
investigations.
24. The FIR recites that victim boy was under deep
mental pressure because the appellant herein had
harassed and insulted him in the presence of everyone
and he was not willing to go to school on 25.04.2018 but
was persuaded to go to school by the complainant. When
he returned from the school, again he was under very
much pressure and on being enquired told that today
again he was harassed and insulted by the GEO, PTI Sir
(the appellant). The boy was informed that the parents
Page 20 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
have been called to school next day and this brought him
under further severe pressure and tension.” tension.”
9. Thus, for sustaining a charge under Section 306, it must be
shown that the accused contributed to the suicide by the deceased
through some direct or indirect act. To attract the offence of
abetment to suicide, proof of direct or indirect acts of instigation or
incitement of suicide by the accused is required. Not only this the
said instigation or incitement must be close and proximate to the
commission of the suicide by the deceased. Coupled with the fact
that such instigation or incitement should also reveal a clear mens
rea to abet the commission of suicide and thereby should put the
victim in such a position that he/she would have no other option but
to commit suicide. Thus, when abetment involves a mental process
of instigation or intentionally aiding any other person to do a
particular thing in the absence of mens rea on part of the accused
being apparent from the face of the record, a charge under Section
306 cannot be sustained. However, mens rea cannot simply be
presumed or inferred, it must be evident and explicitly discernible
from the materials on record and in absence of such material, the
foundational requirement of establishing abetment under the penal
law namely deliberate and conspicuous intention to provoke or
contribute to the act of suicide would remain unfulfilled. Since mere
allegations of harassment, by itself, are not sufficient for holding the
accused of abetting suicide. If the prosecution fails to demonstrate an
active or direct action by the accused that led the deceased to take
Page 21 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
his or her own life would fall short of abetment. Thus, even after
accepting the entire material on record which is available on record
at its face value, if the ingredients of Section 306 read with Section
107 are not satisfied, continuation of criminal proceedings would be
futile exercise resulting into abuse of process of law.
10. Tested on the aforesaid principles if the suicide note is taken
into consideration as it is, what is alleged against the wife is that at
the instance of her father Balwantsang and her real brother Kiritsinh
that the wife had initiated proceedings under the Domestic Violence
Act, and that lodged false cases in courts of Khambhat, Anand and
Dholka, and have not produced any evidence and has thus exerted
physical, mental and financial pressure and has harassed. And in this
conspiracy his wife Prakashba, father of his wife Balwantsang
(father-in-law), brother of his wife Kiritsinh and cousin brother of
his wife Mahipalsinh, and and two advocates of Dholka namely
Shaukatali Javarali Saiyed and and his son Saifali Shaukatali Saiyed
are harassing him and have compelled the deceased to commit
suicide. What is alleged is also that Prakashba used to threaten him
when he used to visit Khambhat by stopping him and threatening.
Similar allegations are also against Kiritsinh and Mahipalsinh. One
allegation is that a false and fabricated rent note has been produced
in the court in the name of Mahipalsinh, and the main conspirator
behind this are advocates of Dholka Mr. S. J. Saiyed and his son. It
is also alleged that Balwantsang has got up false evidence and has
Page 22 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
lodged Domestic Violence and maintenance application and has kept
the deceased under tension. It is also alleged that the advocate
Saiyed has taken false signature of his wife and has lodged separate
cases and are asking for money. The allegations are also that at one
instance at Dholka during a hearing, Rs.10,000/- were forcefully
taken from deceased and that at various dates at the court hearing at
Khambhat they used to ask for money. Once Rs.9,000/- were also
taken away from him forcefully and on 25.10.2021, outside the court
informed the deceased that a warrant is to be issued and that the
deceased would be arrested and has threatened that he would be
dragged till High Court and had taken away Rs.20,000/- and that the
deceased would be dragged till Supreme Court and High Court in
false cases. It is also alleged that he had heard from someone that the
advocate of his wife both had entered into a partnership of 50% and
were trying to extract huge amount from the deceased.
11. In substance, these are the allegations in the undated suicide
note. There is nothing to point out that the present petitioners created
a situation so unbearable or that the torture or harassment was to a
such an extent that it led the deceased to see that suicide was the
only option. None of the statement except for the bare allegations in
the suicide note would not suffice to attract the provisions of Section
306 read with Section 107 of the IPC. It also cannot be said that the
petitioner herein were trying to exploit the emotional vulnerability of
the deceased by making him feel worthless or undeserving of life
Page 23 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
leading him to commit suicide, inasmuch as, the two advocates were
performing their duty of filing various litigations as the instance of
the wife whereas the wife was also pursuing her remedy available
under the law by preferring applications of maintenance and
Domestic Violence Act. The factum of challenging the interim
maintenance by way of criminal revision and filing an application
under Section 125(3) of the Cr.P.C. for recovery of the maintenance
amount and subsequently also filing an criminal appeal under
Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act, and that filing a civil suit
for declaration and permanent injunction qua some of the properties
before the Additional Senior Civil Judge at Dholka cannot be said to
be exploiting emotionally the deceased, making him feeling
worthless, inasmuch as, the deceased himself was also suffering
from skin disease since long is also not in dispute.
12. As far as threatening the deceased with dire consequences, the
allegations are vague, for which no complaint till date has been
lodged, nor such allegations have been leveled against the present
petitioners during any of the proceedings pending before the
competent courts where he was threatened. As far as making false
allegations that may have damaged the reputation of the deceased is
concerned, pursuing legal remedies as available under law by the
wife cannot be termed as making false allegations, because the
competent court seized of the matter, would decide as to whether a
case is made out on merits or not.
Page 24 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
13. A reading of the suicide note, it can be said to be anguish
expressed by the deceased who felt that he was harassed
unnecessarily, but in absence of any specific allegations and material
of definite nature, the anguish being imaginary or inferential one
cannot be considered as a basis to ask the petitioners to face the trial.
Conclusion:-
14. From the overall view of the matter and ascertaining the
materials available on record, there is nothing to indicate, even
prima facie that the accused intended the consequences of suicide
nor is there any material to point out that there was incest
harassment meted out by the present petitioners and that the
deceased was not left with any other option, but to commit suicide as
a last resort, couple with the fact that the wife is living separately
from the deceased since year 2004 and deceased has committed
suicide in the year 2017. Under the circumstances, to put the
petitioners to trial on the charge abetted the commission of suicide
by the deceased, would amount to abuse of process of law.
15. Resultantly, the petition deserves to be allowed. The FIR being
C.R. No.11192008220352 of 2022 lodged before the Bavla Police
Station, District: Ahmedabad Rural, dated 07.12.2022, and
consequential proceedings arising out of it, are hereby quashed and
set aside against the petitioners of both the petitions.
Page 25 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23548/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2026
undefined
16. In view of the main petitions having been allowed, the
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.1 of 2024 stands disposed
of, as having become infructuous.
17. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
(P. M. RAVAL, J)
NITIN MAKWANA
Page 26 of 26
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Sat Aug 01 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 03 20:39:49 IST 2026
