The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to a woman and her friend accused of abetting suicide of a man who was allegedly in a romantic relationship with her.

The Bench of Justice Amit Mahajan emphasized that individuals should not be blamed for the decisions made by someone of weak or fragile mental state that lead to suicide.

"If a lover commits suicide due to love failure, if a student commits suicide because of his poor performance in the examination, a client commits suicide because his case is dismissed, the lady, examiner, lawyer respectively cannot be held to have abetted the commission of suicide. For the wrong decision taken by a man of weak or frail mentality, another person cannot be blamed as having abetted his committing suicide," the Court held.

The Court's observation came while hearing a case where Anticipatory Bail was sought by a woman and a man accused of abetting suicide. The case stemmed from a Complaint filed by the father of a man who tragically ended his life. The deceased was in a romantic relationship with the female Applicant, while the male Applicant was a common friend.

The allegation was that the Applicants instigated the deceased by claiming they were involved in a physical relationship and planned to marry soon. The deceased's body was discovered by his mother, along with a suicide note naming the two Applicants.

While granting Anticipatory Bail, the Court noted that WhatsApp chats revealed the deceased's sensitive nature and his habit of threatening suicide whenever the woman refused to communicate with him.

"It is correct that the deceased had written the name of the applicants in suicide note, but, in the opinion of this Court, there is nothing mentioned, as to the nature of threats in the alleged suicide note written by deceased of such an alarming proportion so as to drive a ‘normal person’ to contemplate suicide," the Court noted in its order dated April 16.

Te Bench said, "The allegation with respect to applicants teasing the deceased in regards to the failure of his romantic relationship with the applicant– Aarushi Gupta, however, does not appear to be instigation which would amount to abetment of suicide in terms of Section 306 IPC." The Court emphasized that the circumstances surrounding the alleged suicide note and the extent of instigation would be examined during the trial.

While acknowledging the mention of the applicants in the suicide note, the Court found no evidence of instigation leading to such an extreme step. It concluded that the note expressed the deceased's anguish toward the applicants but did not demonstrate any intention on their part to drive him to suicide.

"Prima facie, the alleged suicide note only expressed a state of anguish of the deceased towards the applicants, but it cannot be inferred that the applicants had any intention, that led the deceased to commit suicide," the Court observed.

The Court opined that the custodial interrogation of the applicants is not required and directed, "in the event of arrest, the applicants be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000/- each with two sureties each of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the concerned SHO."

While allowing the Bail Applications, the Court clarified, "the observations made in the present order are for the purpose of deciding the present pre-arrest bail application, and should not influence the outcome of the Trial and should not be taken, as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case."

Cause Title: Aarushi Gupta v. State GNCTD of Delhi & connected matter


Applicant: Senior Advocate Maninder Singh , Advocates Vineet Jain, Arjun Sanjay, Aekta Vats, Simran Chaudhary

Respondent: Advocates Utkarsh (APP), Urvashi Sharma

Click here to read/download the Order