KAMARUDDIN DASTAGIR SANADI  versus STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH SHO KAKATI POLICE
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 1269, Supreme Court of India, 2024
Outcome: Appeal(s) allowed (Granted)
Segment: Facts
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 1269 : 2024 INSC 908
Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi  
v.  
State of Karnataka Through SHO Kakati Police
(Criminal Appeal No. 551 of 2012) 
29 November 2024
[Pankaj Mithal* and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the acquittal of 
the appellant-accused and convicting him under Sections 417, 
306 IPC.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 – ss.306, 107, 417 – When asked by the 
deceased, the appellant refused to marry her – Deceased 
committed suicide – On facts, whether the appellant, instigated 
or provoked the deceased to commit suicide:
Held: No – Dying declaration of the deceased indicates that it 
was the deceased who was in love with the appellant and wanted 
to marry him – There was no evidence to prove any physical 
relationship between the two, promise to marry on the part of the 
appellant or that he was instrumental in instigating the deceased 
to consume poison or to commit suicide – When the appellant 
had left the village, it was the deceased who searched about him, 
traced him out and went after him – She called him and when they 
met, he refused to marry her and as her sentiments were hurt, 
she consumed poison – No evidence to prove that the appellant 
instigated or provoked the deceased to kill herself, rather the 
deceased herself carried poison in a bottle with a predetermined 
mind to positively get an affirmation from the appellant to marry 
her, failing which she would commit suicide – To
convict a person 
for abetment of suicide u/s.306, there has to be a clear mens rea 
on the part of the accused to abet such a crime with an active or 
a direct act leading to the commission of suicide – On being asked 
by the deceased, the appellant had simply refused to marry her 
which is not a positive act on his part with any intention to abet the 
crime of suicide – No guilty intention or mens rea on part of the 
* Author
1270
[2024] 11 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
appellant established – Judgment of the High Court set aside – 
Appellant acquitted. [Paras 16, 17, 23, 30, 31]
Penal Code, 1860 – s.306 – Abetment of suicide – In cases of 
marital discords – No offence u/s.306, unless guilty intention 
established: 
Held: Discord and differences in domestic life are quite common in 
society and the commission of offence of suicide largely depends 
upon the mental state of the victim – Until and unless some guilty 
intention on the part of the accused is established, it is ordinarily 
not possible to convict him for an offence u/s.306. [Para 25]
Words and Phrases – “abetment”; “instigation” – Penal Code, 
1860 – ss.306, 107 – Abetment of suicide – Abetment of a 
thing – Discussed. [Paras 21, 22, 23, 24, 26]
Case Law Cited
Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh [2001] Supp. 4 SCR 247 : 
(2001) 9 SCC 618; M. Mohan v. State represented by the Deputy 
Superintendent of Police [2011] 3 SCR 437 : (2011) 3 SCC 626; 
Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu v. State of West Bengal [2009] 15 SCR 
836 : (2010) 1 SCC 707 – relied on.
Prabhu v. State represented by Inspector of Police & Anr. 2024 
SCC Online SC 137 – referred to.  
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860.
List of Keywords
Abetment of suicide; Abetment of a thing; “abetment”; 
“instigation”; Instigated or provoked the deceased to commit 
suicide; Dying declaration; Deceased in love with the accused; 
Broken relationships; Heart breaks; Cheating; No physical
relationship; No promise to marry; Consumed poison; Refusal 
to marry; No guilty intention or mens rea; Active or a direct act 
leading to the commission of suicide; No positive act; Intention to 
abet the crime of suicide; Acquittal reversed; Discord, differences 
in domestic life.
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 
1271
Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi v.  
State of Karnataka Through SHO Kakati Police
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No.  
551 of 2012
From the Judgment and Order dated 15.12.2011 of the High Court 
of Karnataka Circuit Bench at Dharwad in CRLA No.2806 of 2010
Appearances for Parties
Shirish K. Deshpande, Sharanagouda Patil, Ms. Supreeta 
Sharanagouda, Jyotish Pandey, Advs. for the Appellant.
Muhammad Ali Khan, A.A.G., Omar Hoda, Ms. Eesha Bakshi, Arjun 
Sharma, Kamran Khan, Ms. Gurbani Bhatia, D. L. Chidananda, 
Advs. for the Respondent.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Pankaj Mithal, J.
1.	
The accused-appellant was charged under Sections 417, 376 and 
306 of the Indian Penal Code.1 The trial court acquitted him of all 
the above offences, but on appeal by the State of Karnataka to 
the High Court, he was convicted for the offences under Sections 
417 and 306 IPC. However, the acquittal under Section 376 IPC 
was maintained. Hewas awarded sentence of 1 year under Section 
417 IPC with a fine of Rs.5,000/-; and with a sentence of 4 years 
for the offence under Section 306 IPC with a fine of Rs.20,000/-. 
Basically,the conviction of the accused-appellant is for the offences 
of cheating and for abetment of suicide only.
2.	
A girl named Suvarna, aged about 21 years, was in love with the 
accused-appellant for the past 8 years i.e. she was in love with him 
since the age of 13 years. It is alleged that the
accused-appellant 
had promised to marry her but when he refused, she consumed 
poison and committed suicide.
3.	
It is alleged that the accused-appellant, Kamruddin Dastagir Sanadi, 
had promised to marry the deceased before the jamaat (panchayath) 
1	
 In short ‘IPC’
1272
[2024] 11 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
but 4 months prior to the incident, he had left the village and started 
living at Kakati, Karnataka. The deceased came to Kakati in the 
evening of 18.08.2007 and when the accused-appellant clearly 
refused to marry her, she left. The deceased spent the whole night 
at the bus stand at Kakati and in the morning consumed poison 
which she had brought with her from Gadhinglaj. One Badshaha 
(PW-5), relative of the accused-appellant, found her lying at the bus 
stand and took her to hospital at about 08:50 am on 19.08.2007. 
PSI Kakati (PW-15) recorded the statement of the deceased 
between 3 pm and 4 pm & thereafter sent a requisition to the 
Executive Magistrate to record the deceased’s dying declaration. 
The dying declaration of the deceased was recorded by the Taluka 
Executive Magistrate, Belgaum (PW-11) in the presence of the doctor 
(PW-12) between 04.50 pm and 05.20 pm. Thereafter, she died in 
the hospital on the same day itself i.e. on 19.08.2007.
4.	
The mother of the deceased (PW-1) lodged an FIR on 20.08.2007 
under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC at the Police Station, 
Kakati, Circle Belgaum Rural District, Karnataka against the 
accused-appellant and his uncle, alleging that the accused-appellant 
had deceived her daughter by promising to marry her and then 
refusing it, which led to the commission of suicide by her in frustration. 
5.	
After investigation, a chargesheet was drawn and submitted
charging the accused-appellant under Sections 417, 376 and 306 
IPC. The accused-appellant was arrested on 20.08.2007 and later 
released on bail during the trial. The IInd Additional Sessions Judge, 
Belgaum, vide judgment and order dated 13.04.2010 acquitted the 
accused-appellant of all the charges as there was no allegation 
in the dying declaration that the accused-appellant ever had any 
sexual intercourse with the deceased on the pretext of promise to 
marry her or ever had any physical relationship with her. Her only 
allegation was that she consumed poison as he refused to marry 
her. There was no allegation that the accused-appellant instigated 
her to consume poison or to commit suicide.
6.	
Moreover, the statement of mother of the deceased (PW-1) 
revealed that it was only the deceased who was in love with the 
accused-appellant and not the other way around. The deceased had 
impressed upon her mother to convince the accused-appellant to 
marry her as she was in love with him. The mother of the deceased
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 
1273
Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi v.  
State of Karnataka Through SHO Kakati Police
(PW-1) nowhere stated that the accused-appellant was in love 
with her daughter. No other evidence was there to prove that any 
physical relationship was established by the accused-appellant with 
the deceased except that he had agreed to marry her before the 
panchayath, which was not proved.
7.	
Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the 
fact that there was no evidence to suggest that the accused-appellant 
had instigated or aided the deceased in consuming poison and 
committing suicide, the trial court acquitted the accused-appellant. 
8.	
On appeal by the State of Karnataka, the High Court convicted 
the accused-appellant under Sections 417 and 306 IPC. Thus, the 
present appeal.
9.	
Learned counsel for the parties were heard at length and ease.
10.	 The submission of learned counsel for the accused-appellant is that 
there is no iota of evidence on record to prove abetment of suicide 
or cheating on part of the accused-appellant and that the High 
Court is not justified in reversing the decision of acquittal passed 
by the trial court.
11.	 The FIR alleges that the daughter of the complainant, upon 
completion of BA, took admission for MA at Gadhinglaj. She i.e. 
the mother of the deceased came to know that her daughter was 
in love with a Muslim boynamed Kamruddin Dastagir Sanadi of the 
village i.e. the accused-appellant. She complained about
their affair 
with the reputed people of the Muslim community of the village 
and a meeting of the Muslim community was called wherein the 
accused-appellant and her deceased daughter were present and 
both of them agreed to marry. The accused-appellant cheated her 
daughter by giving false assurance of marriage and by entering 
into physical relationship with her, then refusing to marry, which 
compelled her to consume poison, leading to her death.
12.	 The deceased left behind two dying declarations which are on 
record.Exh.P17 is the dying declaration recorded by PSI, Kakati 
(PW-15) whereas Exh.P10 is another dying declaration recorded 
later by the Taluka Executive Magistrate, Belgaum (PW-11) in the 
presence of the doctor (PW-12) in the hospital between 04:50 pm 
to 05:20 pm on 19.08.2007.
1274
[2024] 11 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
13.	 The dying declaration of the deceased duly recorded by PSI, Kakati 
states that the deceased was a 21 year old girl studying in MA 1st 
year. She was in love with the accused-appellant who had left the 
village 4 months back and had started residing at Kakati, Belgaum. 
Allegedly about 8 days before the incident, he had called on her 
phone and asked her to come to Kakati. She reached Kakati in the 
evening of 18.08.2007 and met him at Avanti Hotel. She asked him 
to marry her but he refused to marry and left. She, thereafter, went 
to the bus stop and consumed poison which she had brought with 
her from Gadhinglaj.
14.	 The dying declaration recorded later by Taluka Executive Magistrate 
(PW-11), Belgaum, on 19.08.2007 states that she was aged about 
21 years and was residing with her mother, elder sister and younger 
brother and was studying in MA 1st year. She was having an affair 
with the accused-appellant since last 8 years. Their affair came 
to the knowledge of the elder persons of both the families and all 
of them decided to perform the marriage. The accused-appellant 
agreed to marry her in front of the elders of the village. He left the 
village about 4 months ago and when she made inquiries about 
him, she came to know that he was residing at Kakati. She went 
to Kakati and searched him and made a phone call. Then she met 
him at Avanti Hotel and asked him to marry her but he refused. 
Thereafter, she
consumed poison which she had brought in a bottle 
from Gadhinglaj. She was shifted to the hospital for treatment by 
a relative of the accused-appellant named Badshaha Nazir Pathan 
(PW-5) of Kakati. 
15.	 The aforesaid statement was made in Marathi and a translated copy 
was put on record. The doctor had certified that the patient was 
fully conscious and fit to give statement. The Executive Magistrate, 
Belgaum, has recorded that the deceased had a frustrated mentality.
16.	 The dying declaration of the deceased reveals that there is no 
allegation of any physical relationship between the accused-appellant 
and the deceased or that the accused-appellant had ever entered into 
any physical relationship or had sexual intercourse with the deceased 
under the pretext of marriage. The dying declaration indicates that 
it was the deceased who was in love with the accused-appellant 
and wanted to marry him. When the accused-appellant had left the 
village, it was the deceased who made search about him and came
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 
1275
Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi v.  
State of Karnataka Through SHO Kakati Police
to know that he was residing in Kakati. She herself traced him out 
at Kakati and went after him. She called him and when they met, 
he refused to marry her and thus, as her sentiments were hurt, she 
consumed poison leading to her death. 
17.	 There is no allegation by her that the accused-appellant had 
instigated her to consume poison or to commit suicide. No other 
evidence in this regard has been adduced. Even the mother of 
the deceased (PW-1) in her statement revealed that it was the 
deceased who was in love with the accused-appellant and that she 
wanted her mother to convince him to marry her. The said witness 
though may have stated that the deceased entered into physical 
relationship with her daughter but the same otherwise does not 
stand proved or corroborated, not even by the dying declarations. 
As regards the promise to marry alleged to have been made by the 
accused-appellant, it is said that the same was made before the 
village elders in context with which Najaruddin Mohammad Malik 
(PW-3) and Kashim Babalal Sankeshwar (PW-4) were examined. 
Both these witnesses have stated that they had provided a written 
document regarding the panchayath proceedings to the deceased 
and her mother but no such document was produced by PW-1 to 
prove that the accused-appellant had actually ever promised or 
agreed to marry her daughter. There is allegation but no
evidence to 
prove that the accused-appellant was also in love with the deceased 
or that he was in touch with her in any manner. The allegation that 
both of them were talking to each other on phone is without any 
substance as no evidence was produced in the form of call records 
of either of them to establish that the accused-appellant used to 
call the deceased and talk to her and to establish that he was also 
in love with her. There is no evidence to even establish that the 
accused-appellant entered into any physical relationship with the 
deceased on the pretext of marrying her. So, the evidence fails to 
prove any physical relationship between the two, promise to marry 
on the part of the accused-appellant and that he was instrumental 
in instigating the deceased to consume poison or to commit suicide. 
18.	 Section 306 IPC defines abetment of suicide which reads as under: 
“306. 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.”
1276
[2024] 11 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
19.	 It provides for the punishment for abetting the commission of suicide. 
Therefore, ‘abetment’ of suicide is an essential element for punishing 
a person for an offence under Section 306 IPC.
20.	 Abetment has been defined under Section 107 IPC and it 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.”
21.	 The very first clause of the aforesaid provision lays down that a 
person, who abets the doing of a thing, is a person who instigates 
any person to do that thing. Therefore, ‘instigation’ to do a particular 
thing is necessary for charging a person with abetment.
22.	 ‘Instigation’ is to provoke, incite or encourage a person to do an act. 
23.	 This Court has repeatedly observed that abetment involves a mental 
process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in 
doing of a particular thing and without the positive act on part of the 
accused there would be no instigation. It has also been observed 
that to convict a person for abetment of suicide under Section 306 
IPC, there has to be a clear mens
rea on the part of the accused 
to abet such a crime and it requires an active act or a direct act 
leading to the commission of suicide. 
24.	 In Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh,2 a three Judges 
Bench of this Court dealt with a case of suicide by the wife, where 
the husband in anger uttered-‘You are free to do whatever you wish 
and go wherever you like’.Thereafter, the wife committed suicide. 
The Court, after examining the meaning of instigation which is 
an essential element for abetment of suicide, observed that such 
2	
[2001] Supp. 4 SCR 247 : (2001) 9 SCC 618
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 
1277
Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi v.  
State of Karnataka Through SHO Kakati Police
words, uttered out of emotion, do not constitute mens rea and do 
not amount to intentionally inciting the other party to actually do an 
act which may result in the commission of self-killing/suicide.
25.	 Even in cases where the victim commits suicide, which may be as a 
result of cruelty meted out to her, the Courts have always held that 
discord and differences in domestic life are quite common in society 
and that the commission of such an offence largely depends upon 
the mental state of the victim. Surely, until and unless some guilty 
intention on the part of the accused is established,it is ordinarily 
not possible to convict him for an offence under Section 306 IPC. 
26.	 The salient features constituting an offence under Section 306 IPC 
were elucidated by this Court in M.Mohan vs. State represented 
by the Deputy Superintendent of Police3 and it was observed 
as under: 
“43. This Court in Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Govt. 
of NCT of Delhi) [(2009) 16 SCC 605: (2010) 3 SCC (Cri) 
367] had an occasion to deal with this aspect of abetment. 
The Court dealt with the dictionary meaning of the word 
“instigation” and “goading”. The Court opined that there 
should be intention to provoke, incite or encourage the 
doing of an act by the latter. Each person’s suicidability 
pattern is different from the others. Each person has his 
own idea of self-esteem and
self-respect. Therefore, it is 
impossible to lay down any straitjacket formula in dealing 
with such cases. Each case has to be decided on the 
basis of its own facts and circumstances.
44. 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.
45. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the 
cases decided by this Court are clear that in order to 
convict a person under Section 306 IPC there has to be 
a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires 
3	
[2011] 3 SCR 437 : (2011) 3 SCC 626
1278
[2024] 11 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
an active act or direct act which led the disease to commit 
suicide seeing no option and this act must have been 
intended to push the disease in two such a position that 
he/she committed suicide.”
27.	 The same aspects have been reiterated by this Court in Amalendu 
Pal alias Jhantu vs. State of West Bengal 4 and have been again 
repeated in Prabhu vs. State represented by Inspector of Police 
& Anr.5
28.	 In Prabhu (supra) the Court further observed that broken 
relationships and heart breaks are part of everyday life and that 
breaking-up of the relationship would not constitute any instigation 
or abetment of suicide inasmuch as in order to constitute ‘Instigation’ 
it must be shown that the accused had by his acts and omissions 
or by continued course of conduct created such circumstances 
that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit 
suicide.
29.	 There is no direct evidence adduced by the prosecution to prove 
that the accused-appellant has in any way instigated or provoked 
the deceased to commit suicide. The accused-appellant on asking 
of the deceased had simply refused to marry her which is not a 
positive act on his part with any intention to abet the crime of suicide.
30.	 If we examine the instant case on the touch stone of the above 
principles of law,we find that the accused-appellant had simply 
refused to marry the deceased and thus, even assuming there was 
love between the parties,
it is only a case of broken relationship which 
by itself would not amount to abetment to suicide. The accused-
appellant had not provoked the deceased in any manner to kill 
herself; rather the deceased herself carried poison in a bottle from 
her village while going to Kakati, Karnataka with a predetermined 
mind to positively get an affirmation from the accused-appellant to 
marry her, failing which she would commit suicide. Therefore, in 
such a situation simply because the accused-appellant refused to 
marry her, would not be a case of instigating, inciting or provoking 
the deceased to commit suicide. 
4	
[2009] 15 SCR 836 : (2010) 1 SCC 707
5	
 2024 SCC Online SC 137
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 
1279
Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi v.  
State of Karnataka Through SHO Kakati Police
31.	 Even assuming, though there is no evidence that the accused-
appellant promised to marry the deceased, that there was such 
a promise, it is again a simple case of a broken relationship for 
which there is a different cause of action, but not prosecution or 
conviction for an offence under Section 306, specially in the facts 
and circumstances of the case where no guilty intention or mens 
rea on the part of the accused-appellant had been established.
32.	 In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of 
the opinion that the judgment and order of the High Court dated 
15.12.2011 cannot be sustained in law and is hereby set aside and 
the accused-appellant stands acquitted as was done by the trial court.
33.	 The appeal is allowed with no order as to cost.
Result of the case: Appeal allowed.
†Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey