The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of mental cruelty and its impact on an individual's decision to end their life.

Judgment

SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, J.

( 1 ) IT is yet another unfortunate case of a young girl of 18 years whose all hopes and aspirations to live a happy married life were burnt and destroyed by the burn injuries caused by herself to end her life when the appellants subjected her to cruelty and abetted the commission of suicide by her within 11 months after marriage.

( 2 ) THE appellants were tried for offences under sections 304-B, 306 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The learned sessions judge, after trial acquitted them of all the charges giving benefit of doubt. On appeal, the High Court while confirming the order of acquittal under section 304-B of the IPC, set aside the order of acquittal recorded under sections 306 and 498-A and convicted and sentenced them for two years rigorous imprisonment each for the said offences making the sentences to run concurrently. Thus, aggrieved by this judgment and order of the High Court, the appellants have filed this appeal before this Court. The state has not filed any appeal against the order of the High Court confirming the order acquitting the appellants for the offence under section 304-B of IPC.

( 3 ) THE prosecution case as projected during the trial is that the appellant no. 1 is the son of the appellant no. 2. The deceased Razwana Parveen was married to the appellant no. 1 on 26. 4. 1987. Mohammed Allauddin Asir Mansoori (PW3), allauddin Mansoori (PW4), and Rahman bee (PW5) are the brother, father and the mother of the deceased respectively. On 9. 3. 1988 at about 9. 30 p. m. , the deceased sustained burn injuries in the house of the appellants where she was living. She was shifted to Osmania general hospital at Hyderabad. She died at 11. 00 a. m. on 12. 3. 1988 due to burn injuries. It was alleged by the prosecution that the deceased committed suicide because of cruel treatment of the appellants after her marriage and that the appellants were demanding dowry from her.

( 4 ) THERE is no direct evidence to establish the case of the prosecution. The prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of PWs 3 to 7, dying declaration (exhibit P2) recorded by the magistrate V. Surender Rao (PW1) and exhibit P-12, report made to head constable.

( 5 ) THE learned sessions judge, finding some minor contradictions in exhibit P2 and P12, and that exhibit P-2 was not recorded in the language in which the dying declaration was made, rejected it stating that much weight could not be given to it. He also doubted whether the deceased was in a fit condition to make such a dying declaration. The learned trial judge did not accept the case of the prosecution that scolding and taunting of the deceased by the appellants for not preparing proper food or that she was not good looking was not such a cruelty so as to push her to commit suicide. For no good reasons, the trial court did not accept the evidence of PW3 to 7. The High court, on re-appreciation of the evidence objectively and on dislodging the reasons given by the trial court for acquittal, convicted and sentenced the appellants. The high Court held that the trial court was wrong in rejecting exhibit P2, the dying declaration recorded by PW-1, the magistrate, particularly when it was attested by the doctor on duty, PW11. The High court has noticed that Surender Rao, pw-1, the magistrate has testified that on 10. 3. 1988 he recorded dying declaration between 2. 46 a. m. to 3. 15 a. m. He has certified that he had signed it and had taken the endorsement of the doctor on duty that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make a statement; the deceased had made the dying declaration in question-answer form in urdu and he had translated the version and recorded the declaration in English. After recording her statement, he explained the statement in Hindi to the deceased who admitted its correctness. Thereafter, he took the thumb impression of the deceased on her declaration (exhibit P2 ). In cross-examination, he has stated that he could read and speak in