MP High Court: mere absence of a suicide note doesn't bar a charge of abetment of suicide

A doctor accused of continuously stalking and harassing a woman who later died by suicide sought discharge from charges under Sections 306 (abetment of suicide), 376, 354-A and 354-D of the IPC, arguing there was no suicide note, the relationship was consensual, and mere harassment or a quarrel cannot amount to 'instigation' under Section 107 IPC. Dismissing his criminal revision on 13 October 2026, Justice Pushpendra Yadav held that instigation can be inferred from a continued course of conduct that leaves the victim with no option but to end her life — a test drawn from the Supreme Court's rulings in Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh and Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (NCT of Delhi) — and the absence of a suicide note does not by itself rule this out where other material, including witness statements, an earlier transfer application citing mental torture, and forensic and DNA evidence, discloses a grave suspicion.

Reiterating the discharge standard under Sections 227-228 of the CrPC, the Court held that at the charge stage a judge only has to see whether the material raises a presumption that an offence was committed, not conduct a 'mini-trial' weighing the defence's version against the prosecution's; an earlier acquittal of the accused on a separate, distinct complaint by the same woman did not preclude the framing of fresh charges based on different, later allegations.