In a detailed judgment delivered on December 15, 2025, the Gauhati High Court partly allowed a criminal petition filed by Hussain Md. Rijuan, setting aside the charge of abetment of suicide but allowing prosecution to continue for alleged rape and offences under the POCSO law. The court carefully examined whether the facts justified invoking serious criminal provisions, especially where a young woman died by suicide after a failed relationship.
Background of the Case
The case arose from an FIR lodged in July 2020 at Rupahihat Police Station, Nagaon. The informant alleged that his daughter had been in a romantic relationship with the accused for nearly two years, during which he promised to marry her.
Read also:- Supreme Court Rules Dumpers, Excavators Not ‘Motor Vehicles’; Gujarat Road Tax Demand Quashed
According to the complaint, the accused later refused to marry her, leading to severe emotional distress. Just two days after this refusal, the young woman died by suicide at her home. Initially, the police registered the case for cheating and abetment of suicide under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Later, during investigation, charges of rape under Section 376 IPC and aggravated sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act were added.
The Special POCSO Court at Nagaon took cognizance of all charges in January 2021. Challenging this order, the accused approached the High Court seeking quashing of the proceedings.
Senior counsel for the petitioner argued that the trial court had taken cognizance mechanically, without examining whether the legal ingredients of the offences were made out.
Read also:- Preventive Detention Misused: Supreme Court Frees Telangana Woman Held in Ganja Cases
On abetment of suicide, it was argued that mere refusal to marry, however painful, does not amount to instigation or intentional aid required under law. The defence stressed that there was no evidence of provocation, pressure, or conduct directly pushing the woman towards suicide.
On the POCSO charge, the petitioner claimed that there was no clear allegation of penetrative sexual assault and that the deceased herself had denied sexual relations in certain messages.
The State and the informant opposed the plea, contending that the accused exploited a minor girl on the false promise of marriage and that the emotional trauma caused by his conduct led directly to her death.
Court’s Observations
After examining the materials and Supreme Court precedents, Justice Anjan Moni Kalita held that the essential elements of abetment were missing.
Read also:- Supreme Court curbs private fraud complaints under Companies Act, partially quashes Telangana
The court noted that to attract Section 306 IPC, the prosecution must show instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid leading to suicide. Emotional distress alone, without a direct or indirect act encouraging suicide, is not enough.
“The refusal to marry, by itself, cannot be treated as instigation to commit suicide unless accompanied by conduct showing clear intent to push the victim towards such an act,” the bench observed.
Finding no material indicating mens rea or active involvement of the accused in provoking the suicide, the court quashed the charge under Section 306 IPC.
However, the High Court took a different view on the allegations of sexual exploitation.
The court examined the FIR, witness statements, and the vernacular term used to describe the relationship, noting that in common Assamese usage, it implied a sexual relationship. Statements of family members and other witnesses also pointed towards ongoing physical intimacy over two years.
Crucially, the court observed that although the deceased was 19 at the time of her death, the alleged sexual relationship began when she was still a minor. At this stage, the birth certificate and investigation materials were sufficient to raise a prima facie case.
“This Court is not conducting a mini trial,” the judge noted, adding that the truth of the allegations must be tested during evidence.
Accordingly, the court refused to interfere with the cognizance taken under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
Read also:- J&K High Court Upholds Acquittal in Larnoo Rape Case, Says Trial Would Have Been an “Empty
Final Decision
The High Court partly allowed the petition. The charge of abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC was quashed, but proceedings for cheating, rape, and aggravated sexual assault under POCSO were permitted to continue before the trial court.
Case Title: Hussain Md. Rijuan @ Hussain Mahammad Rizuwan vs State of Assam
Case No.: Crl. Pet. 800/2021
Case Type: Criminal Petition (Section 482 CrPC)
Decision Date: 15 December 2025
