The Madhya Pradesh High Court has clarified that mere allegations of domestic harassment, without any proximate act demonstrating intent to abet suicide, cannot sustain a charge under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. This ruling reinforces the principle that abetment requires active encouragement or intentional facilitation, not passive or generalized conduct.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The applicant, Kajal Bai, is accused of abetting the suicide of Aneesha alias Anita, her maternal aunt-in-law, under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The alleged offence arose from a complex family dynamic involving multiple relatives and longstanding domestic tensions.
Key Facts
- Aneesha alias Anita was married to Sodan Singh in 2023
- Sodan Singh and Aneesha resided with Kajal Bai (maternal aunt-in-law), Bhanwarlal (maternal uncle-in-law), Lakhan, and Prakash (maternal brother-in-laws)
- Sodan Singh frequently traveled outstation to sell blankets, leaving Aneesha in the care of the household
- Kajal Bai, Bhanwarlal, Lakhan, and Prakash allegedly harassed Aneesha over petty domestic issues during Sodan Singh’s absence
- Prakash and Heera went to Village Chakkmed to bring Sapna (Sodan Singh’s sister-in-law) back to the household
- An altercation occurred during this visit; Prakash and Heera allegedly threatened to kill Aneesha if Sapna was not sent to her parental home
- The next day, Aneesha hanged herself at her matrimonial home
- Relatives suspected suicide due to harassment and filed a complaint
- Crime No. 25/2026 was registered at Police Station Jharda, District Ujjain, on 18.02.2026
- Kajal Bai was arrested on 18.02.2026 and has remained in judicial custody since
- No specific allegation implicates Kajal Bai in directly threatening Aneesha or instigating her suicide
- Investigation is nearly complete; witness statements have been recorded
- No prior criminal record against Kajal Bai
- Kajal Bai is approximately 40 years old, a homemaker/labourer, with family responsibilities
Procedural History
- 18.02.2026: Arrest of Kajal Bai following registration of Crime No. 25/2026
- 07.04.2026: Application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail
- 07.04.2026: Hearing before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore
Relief Sought
The applicant seeks release on regular bail pending trial, arguing that the allegations do not constitute a cognizable offence under Section 108 BNS, 2023, and that continued custody is unjustified given her clean record, family obligations, and lack of risk of tampering or flight.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is attracted when the accused is alleged to have engaged in general domestic harassment without any proximate, intentional, or direct act of instigation, encouragement, or abetment leading to suicide.
Arguments Presented
For the Appellant/Petitioner
The applicant’s counsel relied on Gangula Mohan Reddy v. State of A.P., M. Mohan v. State, Amalendu Pal @ Jhantu v. State of West Bengal, Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra, and Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. State of Maharashtra to argue that abetment of suicide requires a positive, proximate act demonstrating mens rea. Mere harassment, even if persistent, without evidence of direct threat, instigation, or coercion by the applicant, does not meet the threshold for criminal liability under Section 108 BNS. The counsel emphasized that the investigation is complete, no custodial interrogation is required, and the applicant has no history of evading process or tampering with evidence.
For the Respondent/State
The State opposed bail on the grounds of the gravity of the alleged offence. However, the Government Advocate conceded that no specific allegation tied Kajal Bai to direct threats or instigation. No evidence was presented to show that she personally threatened the deceased or played a role in the immediate events leading to the suicide. The State did not dispute the applicant’s clean record or socio-economic status.
The Court's Analysis
The Court examined the nature of the allegations and the legal standard for abetment under Section 108 BNS, 2023. It noted that while the case diary records general harassment by multiple family members, there is no specific attribution of threatening conduct to the applicant. The Court emphasized that abetment requires more than passive presence or generalized domestic friction.
"Mere harassment without any positive proximate action on part of the accused showing mens-rea to abet the suicide does not amount to abetment for suicide."
The Court cited multiple Supreme Court precedents affirming that the law does not criminalize ordinary domestic discord. The absence of any direct threat, instigation, or coercion by Kajal Bai against the deceased rendered the charge speculative at this stage. The Court further observed that the investigation was complete, custodial interrogation was unnecessary, and the applicant had no criminal antecedents, no history of non-cooperation, and strong family ties. The Court held that incarceration at this juncture would be disproportionate and unjustified.
The Verdict
The applicant succeeded. The Court granted regular bail to Kajal Bai upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety of the same amount. The bail is subject to five conditions, including presence at all hearings, no reoffending, no witness tampering, no intimidation of persons acquainted with the case, and compliance with Section 346 of BNS, 2023. The bail order remains in force until the conclusion of trial, subject to cancellation by the trial court for breach.
What This Means For Similar Cases
General Harassment Alone Is Not Abetment
- Practitioners must now distinguish between chronic domestic tension and actionable abetment under Section 108 BNS
- Merely alleging persistent verbal abuse or emotional pressure without a proximate act of instigation will not sustain a charge
- Prosecutors must identify specific, direct, and intentional conduct linking the accused to the suicide
Bail Should Be the Norm in Absence of Proximate Act
- In cases where the accused has no prior record and the investigation is complete, bail should be granted as a matter of course
- Courts must reject blanket opposition to bail based solely on the gravity of the alleged offence
- Socio-economic status and family responsibilities are relevant factors in assessing flight risk and recidivism
Evidence Must Be Specific, Not Omnibus
- Complaints must clearly attribute acts to specific individuals; omnibus allegations against multiple family members are legally insufficient
- Courts must scrutinize case diaries for direct links between accused and the act of abetment
- Absence of specific allegations against an accused must lead to early release, not prolonged custody
