Delhi high court grants regular bail to man after ex’s suicide following breakup

NEW DELHI: The Delhi high court has granted regular bail to a man accused of abetment of suicide, observing that the breakdown of a romantic relationship, by itself, does not amount to instigation under criminal law. Justice Manoj Jain passed the order, noting that the prosecution material did not conclusively establish the essential ingredients required to invoke the offence of abetment. The case stemmed from an FIR registered at the Delhi Police’s Swarup Nagar police station after a 27-year-old woman died by suicide in October 2025. In the complaint, her father alleged that the applicant had pressured her to convert her religion and marry him, which allegedly caused mental distress leading to her death. According to the complaint, the deceased, a school teacher, came into contact with the applicant, a university professor, during her academic pursuits. The father claimed that the applicant developed a relationship with her and later insisted on religious conversion as a precondition for marriage. The defence argued that the two had been in a consensual relationship for nearly eight years but separated in February 2025 due to parental opposition.

The applicant subsequently married another woman on October 19, 2025, while the suicide occurred five days later. The defence contended that the deceased may have been under emotional strain due to family pressures and the breakup rather than any instigation by the applicant. The Court noted the absence of a suicide note or dying declaration indicating provocation or instigation. It further observed that during the eight-year relationship, no complaint alleging coercion or harassment had been filed. Explaining the legal threshold for abetment, the Court emphasised that instigation requires a clear intention and conduct that leaves the victim with no option but to commit suicide. The judge observed that heartbreak and failed relationships are common, and the mere end of a relationship does not automatically constitute abetment under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (corresponding to Section 306 of the IPC). Statements from the deceased’s friends indicated that she was distressed after the breakup and upon seeing the applicant with another woman. However, none of the statements referred to pressure for religious conversion. The Court also pointed to a significant time gap between the end of contact and the suicide. Taking into account that the investigation was complete, the charge sheet had been filed, and the applicant had no criminal antecedents, the Court held that continued custody was unwarranted. Bail was granted on furnishing a personal bond of Rs 25,000 with surety, subject to the condition that the applicant shall not contact or influence witnesses or the deceased’s family. The Court clarified that its observations were prima facie and that the trial court would ultimately determine whether the suicide resulted from provocation, emotional distress, or other factors.(With agency inputs)