Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

Naresh Kumar vs. State of Haryana

Not available · 2024 INSC 149Decided 22 Feb 2024
Not available
Justice J.B. Pardiwala · Justice Manoj Misra

Background

Naresh Kumar was convicted by a Trial Court, and the conviction affirmed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, for abetting the suicide of his wife Rani under Section 306 IPC. The couple married in 1992 and had a daughter. Rani died by consuming poison in November 1993. The prosecution's case, based on the testimony of her brother and father, was that Naresh and his parents had repeatedly demanded money from Rani's family so Naresh could start a shop, and that this harassment drove her to suicide.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and acquitted Naresh Kumar, setting aside the conviction. It held that the oral evidence of the deceased's brother and father showed only a demand for money to start a business, with no proof of the kind of incessant cruelty or harassment that would leave a person with no option but suicide. Relying on precedents including Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan and S.S. Cheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan, the Court reiterated that abetment under Section 107 IPC requires a positive act of instigation or intentional aiding with a clear mens rea, and that a mere demand for money, without more, does not amount to cruelty or harassment sufficient to sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC.

Lesson Learnt

A conviction for abetment of suicide cannot rest on evidence of financial demands or family friction alone. The prosecution must show a clear, proximate act of instigation or intentional aiding with the requisite guilty intent; courts will not presume abetment merely because a spouse died within a few years of marriage.

Naresh Kumar vs. State of Haryana – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware