In a quiet but emotionally charged hearing, the Supreme Court on Monday set aside criminal proceedings against a Punjab lawyer accused of abetting the suicide of a young woman with whom he shared a close relationship. The bench noted that heartbreak, however tragic, does not automatically translate into criminal liability under India’s abetment laws. The courtroom atmosphere was somber, and even the judges remarked on the "sad loss of a young life," while emphasizing the need to adhere strictly to legal principles rather than sentiment.
Background
The case dates back to November 2016, when a 26-year-old government advocate in Amritsar died after consuming poison at her residence. Her mother lodged an FIR alleging that the appellant, Yadwinder Singh @ Sunny, had promised to marry her but later backed out due to family pressure. This emotional distress, she claimed, drove the daughter to her death.
A supplementary statement given two days later expanded the allegations to include claims of mental and physical exploitation. Based on this, a charge under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (abetment of suicide) was pursued. The Punjab and Haryana High Court declined to quash the case, prompting the appeal to the Supreme Court.
Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan, carefully reviewed the evidence and statements recorded. They noted clear signs that the second statement given by the complainant added significant new allegations not present in the original report.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Upholds DGGI’s Power to Attach Bank Accounts Under Section 83 of the CGST Act
“The bench observed, ‘Even if we accept the prosecution’s case in totality, the ingredients of abetment are not fulfilled. Mere refusal to marry, however unfortunate, cannot amount to instigation.’”
The judges referred to earlier rulings clarifying that abetment requires deliberate provocation-something that pushes the victim to a point of having no other option. Emotional disappointment, they said, however intense, does not meet this threshold.
They also highlighted that the relationship appeared consensual, affectionate, and marked by genuine intentions on both sides. The appellant’s reluctance stemmed from his family's objection, not any deliberate act to harm the deceased.
One part of the judgment quietly resonated through the courtroom:
“One sensitive moment took away the life of a young girl. But as judges, we cannot allow emotions to overshadow the law.”
Decision
Holding that continuation of the trial would be a “travesty of justice”, the Court quashed the FIR registered at Chhehrata Police Station as well as all criminal proceedings pending before the Amritsar Sessions Court.
The appeal was allowed. The case stands closed at this stage.
Case Title: Yadwinder Singh @ Sunny vs. State of Punjab, Supreme Court (2025)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice J.B. Pardiwala & Justice K.V. Viswanathan
Year of Judgment: 2025
