Supreme Court rules out political career insults as reason behind MP Mohan Delkar’s suicide

The Supreme Court of India today has upheld the quashing of FIR by the Bombay High Court against persons, both in the administration and the police, accused of abetting the suicide of seven-time Member of Parliament Mohan Delkar.

Delkar committed suicide on February 22, 2021, leaving behind a suicide note which named persons, both in the administration and the police, who according to him, conspired to defame, degrade and demean him so as to end his political career and bring down his social standing, thus driving him to suicide; which he proclaimed in his last note, was his only option.

Court was told that a concerted effort was underway to diminish his public image and finish off his political life. The statements of the witnesses were read over before court arguing that it would clearly indicate that there was an attempt of extortion and an attempt of forceful takeover of a college owned and managed by a Trust, formed by the deceased. It was further submitted that a conspiracy was hatched to tarnish Delkar's political image, especially because he had won as an independent candidate, without any political affiliation, to the Lok Sabha seven times.  

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the respondent State pointed out that the allegations, on the face of it, arise from oversensitivity

A CJI BR Gavai led bench did not found the suicide to be a direct result of the actions complained of. "Tragically a life is lost, leaving questions unanswered. Despite our anxious reading and re-reading, the complaints made, the statements recorded, the suicide note; over which there is a cloud, and the subsequent conduct of the police regarding the delay in registering a crime and the casual statements made in the FIR, persuade us to negate the contention that the allegations levelled were the direct causation of the death.", the bench has observed.

Supreme Court has further said, "True, a person unable to bear the pressure or withstand a humiliation or unable to oppose, may succumb to the extreme act of ending his own life, in desperation; but that would not necessarily mean that the alleged perpetrator had an intention to lead the victim to eventual death by his own or her own hands. We find no such instigation on the part of the accused in this case, or a definitive abetment to suicide, as alleged in the FIR.".

After the FIR was quashed by the Bombay High Court, Delkar's son approached the Supreme Court challenging the said decision. The Apex Court noted that nothing was produced either by Delkar's son or the State to show that the suicide note was recovered along with the body; which definitely would have been indicated in the Mahazar recorded at the inquest. 

"There is also no verification carried out of the handwriting in the suicide note, juxtaposed with the admitted handwriting of the deceased. Above all, the suicide note makes pointed allegations against named individuals, which was not done earlier", court has said.

On allegations against Praful Khoda Patel, Administrator of Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman and Diu, and Lakshadweep, the bench noted that for the first time he was mentioned as an accused, with an allegation of extortion and attempt to forcefully take-over a Trust and the college it runs, after the suicide noted was found. "The actions of the officers of the administration, alleged to be a direct result of the conspiracy hatched by the Administrator to coerce the petitioner, was never raised any time earlier. We cannot place any absolute reliance on the suicide note, to ferret out a case of abetment...", the top court found.

The Supreme court also dealt with the Delkar's complaints being heard by Committee of Privileges in the Lok Sabha which had been looking into the breach of parliamentary privileges. It found that before the Committee of Privileges, there was no whisper about the Administrator or the extortion attempted or even the takeover of the trust as alleged.

Accordingly, court held the Division Bench of the High Court had rightly quashed the proceedings, finding the charge of abetment to commit suicide to be absent. "There arises a cloud on the suicide note, when looking at the admitted statements recorded in the proceedings of the Committee of Privileges and also the manner in which the note was introduced in the case. Before the Committee of Privileges, no reference was made to the various allegations in the suicide note, against the named officers. We have found the suicide note to be suspect and we are not convinced that there is any modicum of material in the case to find abetment of suicide. The High Court was not in error, when it quashed the FIR...", the top court has said.

Case Title: Abhinav Mohan Delkar vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.  

Judgment Date: August 18, 2025

Bench: CJI BR Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran