The Additional Sessions Court in Kapurthala has discharged three police officials — then-serving police officers Navdeep Singh and Balwinder Kumar, and woman constable Jagjit Kaur — in the 2023 Dhillon brothers suicide case, holding that even if the prosecution’s allegations were accepted at face value, the offence of abetment of suicide was not made out.The order was passed by Additional Sessions Judge Gurmeet Tiwana in connection with FIR No. 52, dated September 3, 2023, registered at the Talwandi Chaudhrian police station under Sections 306, 506 and 34 of the IPC. The accused had filed applications under Section 250 of the BNSS, seeking their discharge from the case.According to the prosecution case referred to in the court proceedings, police action concerning Manwajeet Singh Dhillon took place on August 16, 2023. His brother, Jashanbir Singh Dhillon, was subsequently alleged to have become mentally distressed and, on August 17, 2023, jumped into the Beas river. The prosecution alleged that he took the step after becoming disturbed by the police action against his brother.Jashanbir Singh’s body was subsequently recovered from the Beas river and identified on the basis of his clothes, shoes, belt and other belongings. DNA samples were also collected during the investigation. However, according to the court record, the DNA results were inconclusive because of the deteriorated condition of the samples. The FSL report attributed the cause of death to asphyxia due to drowning.After completing the investigation, the police submitted its report under Section 173 of the CrPC.Defence argumentsSenior advocate Rajeev Puri, appearing for the accused, argued that there was no direct or indirect evidence showing that the police officials had abetted Jashanbir Singh’s suicide. The defence submitted that Jashanbir had no direct interaction with any of the accused officials and that the proceedings under Sections 107/151 of the CrPC against his brother, Manwajeet Singh, were part of a lawful police process.The defence also relied on the DNA report, call detail records and other circumstances emerging from the investigation.The prosecution opposed the discharge applications, arguing that sufficient prima facie material existed on record to frame charges and that, at that stage, the court was not required to undertake a detailed assessment of the ultimate evidentiary value of the material.Court finds no prima facie case of abetmentThe court observed that merely because a person dies by suicide following an incident, it cannot automatically be concluded that those involved in the preceding events had abetted the suicide.For an offence of abetment of suicide, the court held, there must be material indicating that the accused had the requisite intention and played a positive role that instigated or encouraged the deceased to take his own life.The court noted that Jashanbir Singh had no direct contact with the accused officials. Although he had come to the police station and was allegedly distressed after witnessing the action taken against his brother, the prosecution material did not establish a clear link between any specific act of the accused and direct instigation to commit suicide.The court further observed that even if the police action against Manwajeet Singh were considered improper, remedies such as approaching senior police authorities or pursuing other legal measures were available. Criminal liability for abetment of suicide, the court held, could not be fastened on police officials merely because a person became deeply distressed over action taken against a relative and subsequently died by suicide.Three accused dischargedThe court concluded that even if the allegations on record were accepted as true in their entirety, the essential ingredients of the offence of abetment of suicide were not established. It therefore found insufficient grounds to proceed against the accused.Accordingly, Additional Sessions Judge Gurmeet Tiwana allowed the discharge applications and discharged Navdeep Singh, Balwinder Kumar and Jagjit Kaur from the case.The court also directed that the case file be consigned to the Judicial Record Room, Kapurthala.