---

---

The Supreme Court has clarified that heated exchanges and physical quarrels between neighbours, though unfortunate, cannot by themselves amount to abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. In the case of Geeta vs. State of Karnataka, Justices BV Nagarathna and KV Viswanathan overturned the conviction of Geeta, who had been sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for allegedly instigating her neighbour Sarika’s suicide by persistent abuse and a physical scuffle.

The bench emphasized that “instigation” requires proof of goading, urging, provoking, or inciting the deceased to a degree where suicide seems the only recourse. Mere angry words, harassment, or everyday neighbourhood disputes—even if repeated or intense—do not fulfill the necessary mens rea (criminal intent) for abetment. The Court cited the precedent Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, reiterating that circumstances must be such that the victim is left with no other option but to commit suicide.

The judges noted that Sarika’s allegations, even taken at their highest, did not establish Geeta’s intent to drive her neighbour to suicide. The evidence lacked this proximate trigger and continuous pressure necessary to sustain a charge of abetment. The Court concluded that community quarrels are “as old as society” and, absent criminal intent or extreme sustained provocation, are not enough to constitute abetment—even when tragic consequences follow.

Geeta’s conviction was set aside and she was acquitted of all charges, reaffirming that criminal liability under Section 306 IPC demands a strict evidentiary and mental threshold.