Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body · Of offences affecting life
Section 306: Abetment of suicide
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 306
-
Muskan v. Ishaan Khan (Sataniya) and Others
Whether the High Court was right in quashing the criminal proceedings against the private respondents primarily on the ground that the earlier complaints did not mention the two specific incidents dated 22.07.2021 and…
-
Geeta v. The State of Karnataka
Whether the conviction of the appellant u/s.306, IPC is sustainable; was the evidence against the appellant of such nature that the overt acts attributed to her left the deceased-victim with no option except to commit…
-
Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Whether every allegation or accusation levelled, a reprimand or rebuke made, an insinuation or insult voiced or even continuous acts of ill-treatment, harassment and defamation; as alleged in this case, would lead to a…
-
Harjinder Singh v. The State of Punjab & Anr.
Whether the evidence led, in the instant case, justified the Trial Court’s exercise of power u/s.319 CrPC to summon respondent no. 2, and whether the High Court was right in setting that order aside at the threshold.
-
Shenbagavalli and Ors. v. The Inspector of Police, Kancheepuram District and Anr.
Appellants sought for quashing of the chargesheet submitted against them u/s.306 IPC.
-
Shakuntla Devi v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court wherein the appellant’s conviction u/ss.304B and 498A IPC and ss.3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 was converted into that u/s.306 IPC.
-
R. Shashirekha v. State of Karnataka And Others
Issue arose as regards the order by which High Court allowed the petition of the respondents thereby quashing FIR and further investigation under ss.34, 306, 420, 506 of Penal Code, 1860.
-
Patel Babubhai Manohardas & Ors. v. State of Gujarat
The four appellants were convicted by the Trial Court u/ss.306 and 114 of Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years. The High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. Whether the High Court…
-
Ayyub & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order of High Court declining to quash the proceedings against the appellants u/s.306, Penal Code, 1860.
-
Laxmi Das v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Whether the appellant, can be charged with abetment of suicide of the deceased, under Section 306 of the Penal Code (IPC).
-
Mahendra Awase v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether the High Court was justified in declining the prayer of the appellant to discharge him from the offences under Section 306, Penal Code, 1860.
-
Mamta Kaur v. State of Punjab
Whether the appellant can be granted anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No 13 dated 14.02.2023, for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Penal Code, 1860.
-
Ram Pyarey v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
Correctness of the order of conviction against the brother-in-law for the offences punishable u/ss.306, 498-A IPC and s.4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, in the absence of any cogent evidence.
-
Prakash and Others v. The State of Maharashtra and Another
Issue arose whether the courts below were justified in accepting the prosecution case that the act of suicide by the victim was a direct result of the words uttered by the appellants at the mahalokadalat when there was…
-
Jayedeepsinh Pravinsinh Chavda & Ors. v. State of Gujarat
Matter pertains to correctness of the order passed by the High Court refusing to discharge the appellants-accused from offences punishable u/s.306, 498A and 114 of IPC.
-
Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi v. State of Karnataka Through Sho Kakati Police
Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the acquittal of the appellant-accused and convicting him under Sections 417, 306 IPC.
-
HDFC Bank Ltd. v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
What is the nature of enquiry while determining quashing of a First Information Report u/s.482 Cr.P.C., against a Bank and its Officials.
-
Nipun Aneja and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The High Court rejected the application filed by the appellants herein seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings under section 306 of IPC.
-
Parveen Kumar v. The State of Himachal Pradesh
Issue arose, if the High Court was justified in convicting and sentencing the husband u/ss. 498A and 306 IPC for subjecting the victim-wife to cruelty and forcing her to commit suicide.
-
Ranjeet Mittal v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. Etc. Etc.
High Court whether justified in quashing the charges against Respondent Nos.2-5 (husband and in-laws of the victim-deceased) holding that prima facie the respondents did not abet the deceased to commit suicide.
-
Chabi Karmakar & Ors. v. The State of West Bengal
The appellants have been convicted u/ss.498A, 304B and 306 r/w.s.34 of the IPC. The Trial Court had convicted sister-in-law (appellant no.1), husband (appellant no.2) and mother-in-law of the deceased and sentenced them…
-
Rohini Sudarshan Gangurde v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Whether the alleged conduct of the appellant-accused in the nature of marital disputes attracts s.306 IPC read with s.107 IPC.
-
Anees v. The State Govt. of NCT
Murder of appellant-accused’s wife in their house in which the appellant, deceased and their 5 year old daughter lived. s.106, Evidence Act, 1872 was invoked and the appellant was convicted u/s.302, IPC for the murder.…
-
Prabhat Kumar Mishra @ Prabhat Mishra v. The State of U.P. & Anr.
High Court, if justified in rejecting the application filed by the accused appellant u/s. 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceeding of the criminal case registered against him u/s. 306 IPC and s. 3(2)(v) of the Schedule…
-
Kumar @ Shiva Kumar v. State of Karnataka
Appellant was convicted for the offence u/s. 306 IPC by the trial Court and the conviction was upheld by the High Court. Whether the prosecution proved the charge of abetment to commit suicide u/s. 306 IPC against the…
-
Thakore Umedsing Nathusing v. State of Gujarat
Scope of interference by High Court in an appeal challenging acquittal of the accused by the trial Court; standard of proof required to bring home charges in a case based purely on circumstantial evidence.
-
Naresh Kumar v. State of Haryana
Conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable u/s.306, Penal Code, 1860, if justified.
-
Vikas Chandra v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Respondent No.2 was summoned to face the trial for the offence under Section 306 of the Penal Code, 1860. High Court whether justified in quashing the summons.
-
M. Vijayakumar v. State of Tamil Nadu
Prosecution, if succeeded in establishing that there was mens rea on the part of the appellant to commit the offence rather to push the victim to commit suicide and to attract the offence u/s. 306, IPC.
-
Shatrughna Atmaram Patil & Ors. v. Vinod Dodhu Chaudhary & Anr.
One R (owner) sold premises in dispute to five persons. Thereafter, R committed suicide and left behind a suicide note, naming the tenants, who were in possession of premises in question, as abettors. On the strength of…
-
Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India & Others
Writ petition filed u/Art. 32 by one of the victims challenging the order of State of Gujarat granting remission and early release of 11 convicts held guilty in Bilkis Bano matter, if maintainable; writ petitions filed…
-
Munilakshmi v. Narendra Babu & Anr.
Bail granted to Respondent No.1 accused of offences u/ss.109, 120B, 201, 302, 450, 454 r/w s.34, IPC, if to be cancelled, in view of events subsequent to the grant of bail. Bail – Scope of interference – Respondent No.1…
-
Paranagouda and Another v. The State of
Whether the courts below were justified in convicting and sentencing the accused for the offences punishable u/ss. 498A, 304B read with s. 34 IPC and ss. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act; whether the conviction of the…
-
Kamalakar v. State of Karnataka
Whether the prosecution has proved the charges against the appellant-accused u/ss. 498A and 306 IPC beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Balvir Singh v. State of Uttarakhand
The High Court affirmed the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court holding appellant-hus band guilty of the offence of murder punishable u/s.302 of the IPC alongwith the offence punishable u/s. 498A…
- Buddhadeb Saha & Ors. v. The State of West
- Kashibai & Ors. v. The State of Karnataka
- V. P. Singh Etc v. The State of Punjab & Ors.
- Mariano Anto Bruno & Anr. v. The Inspector of Police
- Manendra Prasad Tiwari v. Amit Kumar Tiwari & Anr.
- Daxaben v. The State of Gujarat & Ors.
- Surendran v. State of Kerela
- State of Madhya Pradesh v. Jogendra & Anr.
- Meera v. State by the Inspector of Police Thiruvotriyur Police Station Chennai
- Ravinder Kumar Dhariwal & Anr. v. The Union of India & Ors.
- Mohd. Mustafa v. Union of India & Ors.
- Mahendra K C v. The State of Karnataka & Anr.
- Nasib Singh v. The State of Punjab & Anr.
- Geo Varghese v. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.
- Kanchan Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
- Velladurai v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police
- Gumansinh @ Lalo @ Raju Bhikhabhai Chauhan & Anr. v. The State of Gujarat
- Satbir Singh & Another v. State of Haryana
- Sandeep Kumar and Others v. State of Uttarakhand and Another
- Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
- Gurcharan Singh v. The State of Punjab
- Rana Nahid @ Reshma @ Sana & Anr. v. Sahidul Haq Chisti
- Saeeda Khatoon Arshi v. State of UP & Anr
- Gurjit Singh v. State of Punjab
- State of West Bengal v. Indrajit Kundu & Ors.
- Ude Singh & Ors. v. State of Haryana
- Pradeep Ram v. The State of Jharkhand & Anr.
- Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecological Societies of India (Fogsi) v. Union of India and Others
- The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Deepak
- Narayan Malhari Thorat v. Vinayak Deorao Bhagat and Anr.
- The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Rajaram @ Raja
- Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) Represented Through Legal Representatives v. The State of Karnataka & Ors.
- Joseph Shine v. Union of India
- Siddaling v. The State, Through Kalagi Police Station
- Munshiram v. State of Rajasthan and Anr. Etc.
- Common Cause (A Regd. Society) v. Union of India & Another
- Neera Yadav v. Central Bureau of Investigaton
- Satish Nirankari v. State of Rajasthan
- Pawan Kumar v. State of H.P.
- Heera Lal and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan
- Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab
- K.V. Prakash Babu v. State of Karnataka
- S.P.S. Rathore v. C.B.I. & Anr.
- Muthuramalingam & Ors. v. State Rep. by Insp. of Police
- Satish Shetty v. State of Karnataka
- Balveer Singh & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
- R. Rachaiah v. Home Secretary, Bangalore
- Maya Devi & Anr. v. State of Haryana
- Bhanuben and Anr. v. State of Gujarat
- Raj Bala v. State of Haryana & Ors. Etc. Etc.
- State of Kerala and Others v. S. Unnikrishnan Nair and Others
- V. K. Mishra&Anr. v. State of Utiarakhand &Anr.
- Monju Roy & Ors. v. State of West Bengal
- Rajinder Singh v. State of Punjab
- Ghusabhai Raisangbhai Chorasiya & Ors. v. State of Gujarat
- Sher Singh @ Partapa v. State of Haryana