2007 Supreme(SC) 897

2007(4) Supreme 674
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Madhya Pradesh High Court)
Dr. Arijit Pasayat & D.K. Jain, JJ.
Kishori Lal — Appellant
versus
State of M.P. — Respondent
Appeal (crl.) 1115 of 1999
Decided on : 19-06-2007

VERY IMPORTANT POINT
In case of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide.
IMPORTANT POINTS
Mere fact that husband treated deceased wife with cruelty is not enough to sustain conviction u\s 306 IPC for offence of abetment of suicide.
Merely on allegation of harassment, conviction in terms of section 306 IPC is not sustainable.
If act abetted is committed in consequence of abetment and there is no provision for punishment of such abetment, then offender is to be punished with punishment provided for original offence.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code – 1860 – Section 306 – Abetment of suicide – Suicide by deceased a married woman in matrimonial home by hanging from roof – Conviction of accused husband for abetting deceased to commit suicide – Appeal against conviction – In case of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide – Mere fact that husband treated deceased wife with cruelty is not enough – Merely on allegation of harassment conviction in terms of section 306 IPC is not sustainable – No evidence led to show that accused was in any manner responsible for suicide – So called alleged torture done by accused as spoken by mother of deceased related to alleged incident about 4-5 years prior to occurrence – No mark of any violence was revealed even in postmortem – Analysis of background facts clearly showed that prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused had abetted suicide – Conviction of appellant could not be sustained(Paras 4,7,8)(1995 AIR SCW 4570) Relied upon.

       Indian penal code, 1860 - Section 107 – Offence of Abetment – Ingredients of - A person, abets doing of a thing when he instigates any person to do that thing; or engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing; or intentionally aids, by act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing - These things are essential to complete abetment as a crime. (Para 6)

       Indian penal code, 1860 - Sections 107,109 – Offence of abetment – Punishment for said offence - If act abetted is committed in consequence of abetment and there is no provision for punishment of such abetment, then offender is to be punished with punishment provided for original offence - ‘Abetted’ in Section 109 means specific offence abetted – Hence offence for abetment of which a person is charged with abetment is normally linked with proved offence. (Para 6)

       Words and phrases – Word “instigate” – Meaning of – Word instigate means to provoke, incite, urge on or bring about by persuasion to do any thing. (Para 6)

       Facts of the case :

       Suicide was committed by deceased a married woman herein in the instant case in matrimonial home by hanging from roof. The appellant husband was prosecuted for abetting deceased to commit suicide. The Trial Court convicted appellant primarily relying on evidence of Pws 8,10 and 11, brothers and mother of deceased. An Appeal there against by appellant was dismissed by High Court confirming conviction.

       Aggrieved by said order of conviction and sentence, appellant has preferred present appeal.

       Findings of the Court :

       The Court held that in case of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Mere fact that husband treated deceased wife with cruelty is not enough. Merely on allegation of harassment conviction in terms of section 306 IPC is not sustainable. Categorical statement of Pws 8,10 and 11 in their evidence that after living together for long years some difference cropped up between deceased and accused and deceased started living in house of her parents. Deceased had come to accused’s house only about a month before date of occurrence. No evidence was led to show that accused was in any manner responsible for suicide. So called alleged torture done by accused as spoken by mother of deceased related to alleged incident about 4-5 years prior to occurrence. No mark of any violence was revealed even in postmortem. So called marks on deceased were stated to be several days old and there was no evidence to conclude that those injuries were inflicted by accused.

       The Court further held that however there was ample evidence on record to show that deceased was disturbed because she had not given birth to any child. Categorical statement of PWs 8,10 and 11 that deceased was disappointed and upset due to her failure to beget a child. Analysis of background facts clearly showed that prosecution failed to establish its case. Since Prosecution was unable to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused had abetted suicide. Hence Conviction of appellant could not be sustained. Appeal was accordingly allowed.