Under which circumstances, Creditor making phone call to the debtor for return of his money will not amount to abetment to Suicide?

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. This appeal impugns an order of the High Court

of Gujarat at Ahmedabad dated 23.12.2024, whereby

Crl. Misc. Application No.21648 of 2023 filed by

the appellant under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the First

Information Report (“FIR”) bearing FIR No.

11189001230013, registered at P.S. Halvad, District

Morbi, and all proceedings in pursuance thereof

including the charge sheet, for offences punishable

under Sections 306 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860, has been dismissed.

4. The prosecution case in a nutshell is that the

deceased committed suicide by jumping underneath a

tractor trolley because he felt harassed by

persistent demands to pay off the debt taken by him

from several persons including the appellant. The

case against the appellant is based on a suicide

note alleged to have been recovered from the

clothes worn by the deceased at the time of

committing suicide. Besides, the investigating

agency has collected CDR of calls made by the

appellant to the deceased in last six months. As

per CDR report, the appellant had made 40 calls to

the deceased in last six months. Based on above,

the investigating agency opined that due to

persistent demand to repay loan, the deceased out

of desperation and persistent harassment committed

suicide and, therefore, the appellant is guilty of

an offence of abetment of suicide.

5. The suicide note, alleged to have been written

by the deceased, states that he (i.e., the

deceased) had borrowed money from 9 persons

including the appellant and that they have been

threatening him repeatedly for return of the money.

The suicide note recites that there is no quarrel

in the house and there is no dispute between him

and his family members, who are living happily in

the house.

6. By relying on the aforesaid suicide note, the FIR

in question was lodged. After investigation, a

charge-sheet was submitted on 27.02.2023.

7. The charge-sheet contains a brief narration

of facts, which is extracted below:

“Brief facts of the case

2

Offence under Sections 306 and

506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, in

such a way that the complainant’s

father Jayantibhai had borrowed

lakhs of rupees from the accused

persons and in order to repay the

principal amount along with the

interest, he sold his two

agricultural fields, each measuring

7 bighas, his residential house, a

plot in the village, and all the

gold and silver jewelry belonging

to his mother. Despite the same,

the creditors repeatedly demanded

the money, forced him to pay, and

threatened to kill him if he failed

to pay the money, which the father

of the complainant could not bear

and compelled to commit suicide by

jumping into the back wheel of the

tractor-trolley.

Before committing this act, he

wrote a note and put it in his

pocket, mentioning the names of the

creditors, stating that these men

repeatedly threatened to kill him

every day, etc. Jayantibhai himself

wrote this note. After the letter

was found, the complainant in this

case filed a complaint, and a

report was registered. The call

details of the victim’s mobile

number were obtained. Upon

reviewing the call details, it was

found that the victim’s number had

3

been called repeatedly from the

mobile phone number of the accused.

After questioning accused No. 1, he

stated that he had lent two lakh

rupees to the victim, Jayantibhai,

and in return, had received a

cheque from SBI Bank. He had been

repeatedly trying to collect this

money, both in person and through

phone calls. Therefore, accused No.

1 was arrested for this offense.

Accused Nos. 2 to 7, after

obtaining anticipatory bail from

the court of the 2nd Additional

Sessions Judge, Morbi, provided the

following statements:

• Accused No. 2 stated that in

2018, his father had lent Rs.

1,00,000 and his mother had lent

Rs.5,00,000, totaling Rs. 6, 00,

000 to the victim.

 Accused No. 3 stated that he

lent Rs. 14,00,000/- and had a

mortgage written for it, which he

presented.

 Accused No. 4 stated that he

lent Rs. 17,50,000/- on 01/04/2017,

and a promissory note in this

regard was made on a Rs.100 stamp

paper, which he presented.

 Accused No. 5 stated that he

lent Rs. 1, 00, 000 and collected

the money given by the mother of

accused No.2.

 Accused No. 6 lent Rs.

4

5,50,000/- in 2020.

 Accused No. 7 lent Rs. 50,000

and then another Rs. 50,000/- in

2022.

 Accused No. 8 lent Rs. 4, 00,

000/- in 2019, and in return, he

received a cheque from SBI Bank. He

later lent another Rs. 6,00, 000/-,

bringing the total to Rs. 10, 00,

000/-, and presented the cheque.

Accused No. 9 was granted a

stay against his arrest until

22.06.2023 by the Hon’ble High

Court of Gujarat, as per the order

dated 16.01.2023 in CRMA No.

1161/2023, converted from CRMA No.

2069/2023. As a result, he has not

been arrested. However, during the

investigation, it was discovered

that he had repeatedly called the

victim from his mobile phone, and

the victim mentioned his name in a

letter before his death.

Therefore, sufficient evidence

has been collected against the

accused persons, and I am

submitting a charge-sheet against

the accused to initiate judicial

action. ”

8. The High Court dismissed the quashing

petition on the ground that there exists material

on record to prima facie indicate that the

creditors had been making repeated calls, and the

5

suicide note, besides naming the accused, states

that threats were extended by those creditors.

9. Aggrieved by dismissal of the quashing

petition, this appeal has been filed.

10. The learned counsel for the appellant

submits that it is not in issue that the deceased

had borrowed money from several persons and had

defaulted in payment of the money borrowed by him.

The material collected during investigation only

reflects that those creditors (i.e., the accused)

who had lent money to the deceased had made phone

calls to the deceased. Admittedly, the contents of

those calls are not on record and there is no audio

recording to indicate that any threat was extended.

As far as the suicide note is concerned, though it

alleges that creditors have been extending threats,

there are no details of how and where those threats

were extended. Further, there are 9 persons named

in the suicide note, but it is not specified as to

who extended what kind of threat and when. Besides,

it is not shown that they constitute one group, or

are part of a family, and are harassing the

deceased as a group of persons. Moreover, if a

creditor makes a demand for return of the money

lent, demand being a lawful act, that by itself

cannot constitute an offence of abetment. As

regards the allegation of extending life threats,

6

the same is not substantiated by any cogent

evidence except the cryptic statement in the

suicide note. Even the evidence collected during

investigation does not narrate any incident wherein

such threats might have been extended to the

deceased by any of the accused. In such

circumstances, it is submitted by the learned

counsel for the appellant, continuance of the

proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of

the court and to secure the ends of justice, such

proceedings should be quashed.

11. Per contra, on behalf of the State, it is

submitted that upon investigation it was found that

40 mobile calls were made to the deceased by the

appellant-accused in last six months and since the

suicide note implicates the creditors including the

appellant, it is possible that such threats may

have driven the deceased to commit suicide,

therefore, it is a matter of trial whether those

threats would amount to abetment of suicide or not.

Hence, he prayed that the appeal should be

dismissed.

12. We have accorded due consideration to the

rival contentions and have perused the materials

placed on record.

13. What is evident from the charge-sheet

submitted by the investigating agency is that the

deceased had borrowed money from multiple accused.

Insofar as the present appellant is concerned, it

appears the deceased initially borrowed Rs. 4 lacs

and in lieu thereof, issued a cheque drawn on State

Bank of India. Later, Rs. 6 lacs were also lent.

The only basis on which the charge-sheet has been

laid against the accused is the suicide note

coupled with the call detail records which indicate

that 40 phone calls were made by the appellant to

the deceased in last six months. As far as the

suicide note is concerned, we find that it lacks

material particulars regarding the nature of those

threats and the time and place when those threats

were extended. Moreover, the suicide note indicts

as many as 9 accused without specifying the role of

any one of them. It is not the case of the

prosecution that all accused belong to one family

or were harassing the deceased as a group. Further,

the deceased has painted all creditors with one

brush. Therefore, a trial based on such a suicide

note would be a futile exercise. Besides, if a

creditor makes a phone call to the debtor for

return of his money that being a lawful act, it

cannot on its own constitute a ground to prosecute

the creditor. Moreover, the deceased may have

committed suicide on account of depression for not

being able to clear of the debt.

14. In such circumstances, particularly when

there is no material to indicate that the deceased

was beaten or physically assaulted to return the

dues, we are of the view that there is hardly any

material on basis whereof it could be inferred that

the appellant by demanding his dues abetted

commission of suicide by the deceased. In our view,

therefore, the continuance of the proceedings

against the appellant would be a futile exercise

and would amount to abuse of the process of the

Court. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, it is

necessary that the same be quashed.

15. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The

order passed by the High Court is set aside. The

impugned criminal proceedings qua the appellant are

hereby quashed.

16. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand

disposed of.

…………………………………………..J

[MANOJ MISRA]

…………………………………………..J

[MANMOHAN]

New Delhi;

March 10, 2026