The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed criminal proceedings against six individuals accused of abetting the suicide of a woman after her partner allegedly declined to marry her. The court ruled that a refusal to marry in the context of a consensual relationship does not, by itself, constitute abetment to suicide.

The case originated in Telangana’s Medchal-Malkajgiri District, where the woman had been living with the first appellant for approximately three months. Following her death by suicide, her siblings alleged that the partner’s refusal to marry her was the precipitating factor. The initial complaint was filed based on a statement by the deceased’s sister.

According to the prosecution, the deceased resided at the alleged partner’s house, and their relationship was consensual. It was further claimed that the first appellant's friend had spoken disparagingly about the woman, while his family opposed the relationship. Additionally, the sister’s prospective groom reportedly withdrew from marriage arrangements if the first appellant were to marry the deceased, creating additional pressure on the relationship.

A Bench composed of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran quashed the proceedings pending before the II Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. The court observed there was no material evidence indicating that any of the accused had instigated the woman to take her own life.

The judgment noted that the woman had informed her eldest sister of the first appellant’s refusal to marry her just before her suicide. However, the Supreme Court held that such a refusal did not amount to intentional instigation or abetment. “We are unable to find any instigation by the accused/appellants to drive the deceased to death by suicide. It was neither intended nor can it be said to be abetment,” the order stated.

The bench emphasized that individuals respond differently to personal setbacks and that a suicide following a breakup cannot automatically be classified as abetment. “People react differently to situations, and if a breakup ends up with suicide, it cannot always be termed an abetment to suicide,” the court clarified.

This ruling underscores the judiciary’s position that criminal liability for abetment requires clear evidence of instigation or encouragement to commit suicide, beyond the mere refusal to enter into marriage.