Mumbai: A man cannot be held liable for abetting a woman’s suicide merely because their long-term relationship ended, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has held. The court discharged a man who was booked for abetting suicide of a woman with whom he was in a relationship for nine years.

“It is only a case of broken relationship which by itself would not amount to abetment to commit suicide,” Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke said on January 15. The judge emphasised that the extensive suicide note left by the deceased and the WhatsApp conversations between the two revealed it was a consensual love relationship. “The physical relations between them were developed out of love and were consensual,” she noted.

The judge pointed out that there was no evidence in the investigation suggesting the man provoked or instigated the woman to end her life. “The evidence shows that after the relationship ended, the deceased remained in contact with the applicant. Merely refusing to marry her does not amount to instigating or provoking her to commit suicide. At most, the applicant can be said to have ended the relationship,” the court remarked.

The court also noted that neither the suicide note nor the WhatsApp messages indicated that the man had established physical relations with the woman under a false promise of marriage. Importantly, the court observed that the woman’s suicide was not an immediate result of the breakup. “The applicant denied the relationship in July 2020, while the deceased committed suicide on December 3, 2020. There is no proximity or direct connection between the breakup and her decision to take her life,” she explained.

The HC overturned the order of the session’s court at Khamgaon in Buldhana district, which had refused to discharge the man from the case. The Sessions Court had considered the father’s argument that the man’s abrupt decision to end the long-term relationship caused his daughter significant mental distress. The suicide note also described the emotional turmoil the woman experienced after the breakup, particularly as the man began dating someone else.

In his defense, the accused argued that their relationship was consensual and that, despite the breakup, the deceased continued to stay in touch with him. He contended that his refusal to marry her could not be considered a basis for an abetment charge. The High Court agreed, finding merit in his arguments and quashing the lower court’s order.

Justice Joshi-Phalke concluded that a broken relationship alone, without evidence of provocation or instigation, cannot form the basis for an abetment to suicide charge.