The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against a man facing allegations of sexual harassment, stalking and abetment of suicide, holding that the material on record prima facie disclosed the ingredients necessary for the prosecution to continue.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna, in an order pronounced on August 18, 2026, said the case could not be treated as one involving a single quarrel or an isolated act. The Court found that the allegations described a continuing course of conduct that required examination at trial.
Background of the Case
The proceedings arose from the death of a 22-year-old nursing student. According to the complaint and charge sheet, the petitioner, allegedly developed a relationship with her and repeatedly insisted that she marry him despite her unwillingness.
The prosecution alleged that he followed her, pressured her to meet him, and threatened to circulate photographs if she refused his demands. It was further alleged that he interfered with her matrimonial prospects by contacting prospective grooms and claiming that he was in a relationship with her.
The record stated that Student had earlier consumed tablets on July 5, 2025, in an alleged attempt to end her life. After intervention by her family and elders, a complaint was withdrawn on an assurance that the petitioner would stay away. The prosecution alleged that the conduct nevertheless continued.
On July 29, 2025, student was found dead in her room. The investigation resulted in a charge sheet in C.C. No.15565/2025 for offences under Sections 75, 78 and 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Arguments Before the Court
The petitioner argued that the essential requirements for abetment of suicide were absent. His counsel submitted that there was no sufficient proximity, instigation or direct act connecting the alleged conduct with the suicide.
The complainant and State opposed the plea, arguing that the allegations disclosed repeated pursuit, threats, interference with marriage negotiations and conduct that allegedly continued even after the earlier suicide attempt.
Court’s Observation
The High Court examined Section 108 of the BNS along with Section 45, which defines abetment through instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid. The Court observed that the question at the stage of quashing was not whether the allegations would ultimately be proved beyond reasonable doubt, but whether the material disclosed a case requiring trial.
Justice Nagaprasanna noted that the allegations, if proved, could not be viewed as disconnected incidents. The alleged pursuit, threats, interference with marriage prospects and continuation of the conduct after an earlier suicide attempt had to be considered together.
The Court also stressed the limits of its power under Section 528 of the BNSS. It observed,
“the Court today is not declaring the petitioner guilty; it is only declining to declare the prosecution groundless.”
The Court further found that the material prima facie projected “instigation, goading and proximity” - the three aspects relevant to the allegation of abetment of suicide. It said the question of whether the petitioner possessed the required intention, and whether there was an unbroken causal connection between the alleged conduct and the death, would have to be determined through evidence at trial.
Decision
The High Court held that the allegations were not devoid of the ingredients of abetment and that the prosecution could not be stopped at the threshold. The Court accordingly refused to interfere with the pending criminal proceedings.
Finding no merit in the petition, Justice M. Nagaprasanna rejected Criminal Petition No.4666 of 2026. The petitioner was directed to face the trial.
Case Details
Case Title: N. G. v. State of Karnataka & Another
Case Number: Criminal Petition No. 4666 of 2026
Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna
Decision Date: 18 August 2026
