City

Bandra Couple Discharged In Maid Suicide Case; Court Says Workplace Inconvenience Not Abetment

By Sohail Khan 8 September 2026, 9:43 pm

A Mumbai sessions court discharged a Bandra couple accused of abetting the suicide of their domestic help Sarita Toppo in 2022. The court observed that mere workplace inconvenience or an employer’s decision to terminate employment cannot amount to instigation for suicide. It found no evidence that the couple forced, detained or directly provoked the maid to take the extreme step.

Bandra Couple Discharged In Maid Suicide Case; Court Says Workplace Inconvenience Not Abetment | Representational Image

Mumbai: The sessions court has discharged a couple from Bandra booked for abetment of suicide of their maid in March 2023 over allegations of mistreatment, including that she was made to sleep on the floor. The court, while discharging the couple, said mere inconvenience to the deceased (at work) cannot be said to be a reason behind the act of suicide.

According to the prosecution case, the deceased, namely Sarita Toppo, was working as a domestic help in the house of Pankaj Kumar and Priyanka Kumar, residing in Beach View Apartment in Bandra (West). On March 19, 2022, Toppo jumped from the building. The police had earlier lodged a report of accidental death but later, on the complaint of her relative, the couple was booked for abetment of suicide.

It was claimed by the prosecution that deceased Sarita was not working there properly. Therefore, the accused removed her from the job and decided to send her to her relative’s house. But before they could leave her at the relative’s house, she jumped from the window and committed suicide. Sarita's relative, on the other hand, claimed that she was made to sleep on the floor in the living room, along with other allegations.

Defence challenges allegations

The couple's lawyer, Dinesh Tiwari, however, contended that the deceased came to Mumbai on February 22, 2022, and the incident had occurred on March 5, 2022, which was only within 12 days of her arrival. The FIR was registered on March 19, 2022.

Tiwari contended that she committed suicide as the couple decided to relieve her. "If the deceased was not able to work and the accused was willing to relieve her from the service, no inference of ill-treatment can be drawn on the basis of these allegations nor can said act be termed as ‘ill-treatment’."

It was contended that, "the accused (the couple) are residing in a very small house admeasuring 500 sq. ft. There are four members in the family, that is both the accused, their son and daughter. As such, the workload over the accused must be normal. It is not the prosecution’s case that the deceased was overburdened with the work. Though not overburdened, she was not doing the work to the expectation of the accused. If someone is not working properly and the employer wants to discontinue her, it cannot be termed as ill-treatment."

Court rejects suicide abetment charge

The court accepted the contentions of the defence and said that, "these allegations nowhere constitute the instigation or enticement to commit the suicide. If at all the deceased had any inconvenience in the house of the accused, she ought to have left the job. It is not the case of the prosecution that the accused have ever detained and compelled the deceased to do the job and thereafter, they have tortured her."

Also Watch:

"On the contrary, it is the allegation that the accused had decided to remove the deceased from the job as they were unhappy with the work capability of the deceased. It also reflects from the statement of all the witnesses that the deceased was already suffering due to her financial condition. As such, mere inconvenience to the deceased cannot be said to be a reason behind the act of suicide. It is not the case of the prosecution that the accused have directly instigated the deceased to commit suicide," the court said while discharging the couple.