Holding

The FIR does not disclose the essential ingredients of Section 107 IPC; therefore, it is quashed and set aside.

Summary

The husband and his in‑laws (applicants) filed an application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita seeking to quash FIR No. 11210021240053, which alleged offences under Sections 306, 498A, 504, 114 IPC and Sections 3, 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The deceased had a long‑standing history of psychotic depression, prior suicide attempts and was under psychiatric care; her parents affirmed she was not being tortured and expressed a desire to withdraw the complaint. The court examined the evidence and found no proof of the accused’s mens rea or proximate instigation required under Section 107 IPC for abetment of suicide, nor any material linking them to the other offences. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the court held that the FIR failed to disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged crimes. Consequently, the application was allowed and the FIR was quashed and set aside, with all consequent proceedings terminated.

Issues considered

The FIR discloses the essential ingredients of Section 107 IPC (abetment of suicide) and related offences.
Whether the accused possessed the requisite mens rea and proximate act of instigation to constitute abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.
Whether the High Court may exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR.
Whether the allegations under Sections 498A, 504, 114 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act are sustainable in view of the evidence.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s. 528
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 482
Dowry Prohibition Acts. 3, s. 7
Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 107, s. 114, s. 306, s. 498, s. 504

Subjects

abetment of suicideSection 306 IPCSection 498A IPCDowry Prohibition Actmental illnessquash of FIRSection 482 CrPCSection 528 BNSinherent powers of courtabuse of process

Judgment

R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 16497 of 2024
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 16496 of 2024

================================================================
HARDIK GORDHANBHAI RAVAL & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJART & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MS MEDHA N PANDYA(6171) for the Applicants
MR MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS

Date : 13/01/2026

COMMON ORAL ORDER

1. By way of preferring the present application under Section

528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the

applicants-accused, who are the husband and in-laws of the

deceased, seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court,

praying to quash and set-aside the First Information Report

No.11210021240053 of 2024 registered with the Katargam

Police Station Part-A, Surat, for the offences punishable under

Sections 306, 498A, 504, 114 of the Indian Penal Code and

under Sections 3, 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Page 1 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

2. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr.Manan

Maheta waives service of notice of rule for and behalf of the

respondent – State.

3. Learned advocate Ms.Medha N.Pandya appearing for the

applicants-accused has submitted that the marriage between the

deceased and her husband (i.e. the present applicant no.1) was

solemnized in the month of November 2021. It is alleged that

soon after the marriage, the present applicants-accused used to

taunt the deceased regarding her medical expenditure and were

demanding dowry, therefore, the deceased had once consumed

poisonous liquid. Thereafter, with the intervention of the

respected members of the society, a settlement took place and

the deceased had returned to her matrimonial home, and during

that time, she became pregnant and gave a birth to a son, who is

aged about one and a half years. It is further alleged that on the

fateful day (i.e. on 19.01.2024 at around 2 O’clock in the

afternoon), the deceased had consumed acid at her parental

house, where she was residing since last ten months after

discord with her husband and in-laws, and on 22.01.2024 at

around 9 O’clock, the deceased had succumbed during the

Page 2 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

treatment at the Prannath Hospital situated at Katargam.

4. At the outset, learned advocate Ms.Pandya has submitted

that settlement has been arrived at between the parents of the

deceased and the present applicants-accused. Both the parents

of the deceased Hiralben have admitted that their daughter was

suffering from severe psychotic depression since 2016 (i.e. prior

to her marriage), and she was having a tendency to commit

suicide. They have also admitted that even before her marriage,

the deceased had attempted to commit suicide twice. Learned

advocate Ms.Pandya appearing for the applicants-accused has

submitted that the said fact has also been fortified from the

statements of the parents of the deceased dated 04.07.2022 and

the affidavit dated 22.12.2025 filed by the mother of the

deceased, namely, Prabhaben Shantibhai Godadra.

5. Learned advocate Ms.Pandya has further submitted that

the deceased was undertaking treatment from a Psychiatrist,

Dr.Dilip N.Pandav of Umang Clinic since 2013. She was referred

for her behavioral problems, such as, talking rudely with

parents/friends, restlessness, lack of concentration and

Page 3 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

excessive irrelevant talking, and the doctor had diagnosed her

with psychotic depression. Even, the medical history of the

deceased suggests that she was suffering from mental illness,

due to which, she was having a tendency to commit suicide, and

at several times, she had even tried to commit suicide either by

consuming poisonous substance or jumping into the river.

6. Learned advocate Ms.Pandya has, therefore, submitted

that considering the statement of the parents of the deceased as

well as the affidavit, it appears that the impugned FIR lodged by

the deceased is palpably false and there is not an iota of

evidence to implicate the present applicants-accused with the

alleged offence. Learned advocate has further submitted that the

proximity between the alleged act of instigation by the

applicants-accused and the commission of suicide by the

deceased has not been proved as the deceased was residing at

her parental house since last ten months of the alleged incident,

and she committed suicide at her parental house. Ms.Pandya

has further submitted that except the statement of the deceased,

there is no other evidence to connect the present applicants with

the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the deceased has

Page 4 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

made vague, omnibus and general allegations against the

applicants-accused, and the FIR, even if it is considered at its

face value, the same could not even establish the offence as

alleged in the FIR.

7. Learned advocate Ms.Pandya has, therefore, urged that

considering the above, the application may be allowed and the

impugned FIR may be quashed and set-aside.

8. Learned APP Mr.Manan Maheta appearing for the

respondent – State has vehemently opposed the present

application and has submitted that having regard to the

gravamen and seriousness of the offence, the application may

not be entertained and the same may be rejected.

9. From the bare perusal of the complaint, it prima facie

appears that the deceased was suffering from mental illness and

was undertaking treatment since 2013 (i.e. before her marriage

with the present applicant no.1-husband). Further, it appears

from the medical evidence on record as well as the statements of

the parents of the deceased recorded by the police and the

Page 5 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

affidavits filed by them, that the deceased was having a tendency

to commit suicide, due to which, she had even tried to commit

suicide either by consuming poisonous liquid or jumping into

the river. In the statements recorded by the police on

04.07.2022, the parents of the deceased have categorically

stated that the present applicants-accused were not inflicting

torture upon the deceased. Further, in the affidavits filed by

them on 22.12.2025, they have specifically stated that their

daughter was suffering from severe psychotic depression since

2016 and before marriage also, she had tried to commit suicide.

It also appears from the medical evidence on record that she was

undertaking treatment from a Psychiatrist, Dr.Dilip N.Pandav of

Umang Clinic since 2013. The deceased was referred for her

behavioral problems, such as, talking rudely with parents/

friends, restlessness, lack of concentration and excessive

irrelevant talking, and the doctor had diagnosed her with

psychotic depression, due to which, she was having a tendency

to commit suicide, and at several times, she had even tried to

commit suicide either by consuming poisonous substance or

jumping into the river.

Page 6 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

10. It is settled that to attract Section 107 of the IPC, the

accused must have mens rea to instigate the deceased to commit

suicide. The act of instigation must be of such intensity that it is

intended to push the deceased to such a position under which

he or she has no choice but to commit suicide. Such instigation

must be in proximity to the act of committing suicide. In the

present case, it appears that the deceased was suffering from

psychotic depression, due to which, she had a tendency to

commit suicide, and at several times, even before her marriage

with the present applicant no.1-accused, she had even tried to

commit suicide. Further, there is no evidence on record to

suggest as to what had happened soon before the incident since

the deceased was residing at her parental house since last more

than ten months. Moreover, even the parents of the deceased

themselves have also not supported the version narrated by the

deceased in the impugned FIR and have filed affidavit dated

22.12.2025, inter alia contending that they do not want to

continue with the impugned FIR and have no objection if the

complaint is quashed and set-aside.

11. On bare reading of the impugned FIR, this Court does not

Page 7 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

find the essential ingredients of Section 107 of the Indian Penal

Code are being attracted.

12. At this juncture, I may refer to the decision of the Supreme

Court in case of Shenbagavalli and others vs. Inspector of

Police, Kancheepuram District and another, reported in 2025

INSC 607, wherein the Supreme Court held as under :-

“15. Section 306 requires a person having committed
suicide as a first requirement but for abetment of such
commission, which is essential, the ingredients must be
found in Section 107 IPC. The requirement of abetment
under Section 107 IPC is instigation, secondly engagement
by himself or with other person in any conspiracy for doing
such thing or act or a legal omission in pursuance to that
conspiracy and thirdly intentionally aids by any act or an
illegal omission of doing that thing. In large number of
judgments of this Court it stands established that the
essential ingredients of the offense under Section 306 IPC
are (i) the abetment; (ii) intention of the accused to aid and
instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide. Merely
because the act of an accused is highly insulting to the
deceased by using abusive language would not by itself
constitute abetment of suicide. There should be evidence
suggesting that the accused intended by such act to
instigate the deceased to commit suicide. [M.Arjunan vs.

Page 8 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

State represented by its Inspector of Police, (2019) 3 SCC
315]

16. Similarly, in the case of Ude Singh and Others vs.
State of Haryana, (2019) 17 SCC 301 it has been observed
in para 16 as follows :-

“16. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there
must be a proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement
to the commission of suicide. It could hardly be
disputed that the question of cause of a suicide,
particularly in the context of an offence of abetment of
suicide, remains a vexed one, involving multifaceted
and complex attributes of human behaviour and
responses/reactions. In the case of accusation for
abetment of suicide, the court would be looking for
cogent and convincing proof of the act(s) of incitement
to the commission of suicide. In the case of suicide,
mere allegation of harassment of the deceased by
another person would not suffice unless there be such
action on the part of the accused which compels the
person to commit suicide; and such an offending action
ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence.
Whether a person has abetted in the commission of
suicide by another or not, could only be gathered from
the facts and circumstances of each case.

16.1. For the purpose of finding out if a person has
abetted commission of suicide by another, the
consideration would be if the accused is guilty of the

Page 9 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

act of instigation of the act of suicide. As explained
and reiterated by this Court in the decisions above
referred, instigation means to goad, urge forward,
provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. If the
persons who committed suicide had been
hypersensitive and the action of the accused is
otherwise not ordinarily expected to induce a similarly
circumstanced person to commit suicide, it may not be
safe to hold the accused guilty of abetment of suicide.
But, on the other hand, if the accused by his acts and
by his continuous course of conduct creates a situation
which leads the deceased perceiving no other option
except to commit suicide, the case may fall within the
four corners of Section 306 IPC. If the accused plays
an active role in tarnishing the self-esteem and self-
respect of the victim, which eventually draws the
victim to commit suicide, the accused may be held
guilty of abetment of suicide. The question of mens rea
on the part of the accused in such cases would be
examined with reference to the actual acts and deeds
of the accused and if the acts and deeds are only of
such nature where the accused intended nothing more
than harassment or snap show of anger, a particular
case may fall short of the offence of abetment of
suicide. However, if the accused kept on irritating or
annoying the deceased by words or deeds until the
deceased reacted or was provoked, a particular case
may be that of abetment of suicide. Such being the
matter of delicate analysis of human behaviour, each

Page 10 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

case is required to be examined on its own facts, while
taking note of all the surrounding factors having
bearing on the actions and psyche of the accused and
the deceased.

17. These being the essential ingredients for the offence of
abetment to suicide, and the said ingredients having not been
fulfilled, the further continuation of proceedings would not be
sustainable. The other evidence such as statements, sought to be
relied upon by the prosecution, apart from the suicide note, does
not in any manner advance the case of the prosecution,
particularly when the foundation of the case is the suicide note
itself. 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 under Section 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. The
Court cannot permit such proceedings to degenerate into
instruments of harassment or unjust prosecution.

18. The Court would not hesitate to exercise its extraordinary
powers which are inherent to quash such proceedings when it
comes to fore, and the court is satisfied that allowing the
proceedings to continue would be an abuse of process of Court or
that the ends of the justice require that the proceedings ought to
be quashed. Reference in this regard may be made to the
Judgment of this Court in Geo Varghese vs. State of Rajasthan
and Another, (2021) 19 SCC 144.”

Page 11 of 12
R/CR.MA/16497/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2026

13. This Court is quite conscious of the fact that the power

under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is

an extraordinary power, and it should be used sparingly, as the

exercise of such power would scuttle the FIR at the threshold.

But, if the FIR fails to make out essential ingredients of the

offence, the power should be exercised. Upshot of the above

discussion, the present application deserves consideration.

14. In the result, the present application is allowed. The First

Information Report No.11210021240053 of 2024 registered with

the Katargam Police Station Part-A, Surat, for the offences

punishable under Sections 306, 498A, 504, 114 of the Indian

Penal Code as well as under Sections 3, 7 of the Dowry

Prohibition Act, is hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside.

All consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are also

terminated.

15. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.

(VIMAL K. VYAS, J.)
/MOINUDDIN

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MOINUDDIN ABDULLAH SAIYED(HC00172), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 13/01/2026 17:18:14

Page 12 of 12