Back
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
State Of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Madan Gopal – Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of India (Sudhanshu Dhulia, Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.)
Date: 09-01-2025
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; High Court's acquittal of respondent upheld (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Result: No interference under Art.136 Constitution; appeal dismissed (!) (!) (!) .
ORDER :
1. This appeal arises from the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, dated 02.03.2013 in Criminal Appeal No. 534 of 2012 by which the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the respondent and thereby set aside the judgment and order of conviction dated 20.12.2012 passed by the trial court for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 498A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”). The State of Himachal Pradesh is before this Court challenging the respondent’s acquittal by the High Court.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased, who was married to the respondent on 01.07.2009, committed suicide on 30.09.2009 in her matrimonial home by consuming poison. The respondent is alleged to have abetted her suicide since the deceased was being subjected to cruelty and harassment for demand of dowry made by the appellant. A First Information Report viz. FIR No. 32/2009 was lodged by the father of the deceased approximately a week after her death, i.e. on 08.10.2009 with Police Station – Bagga, District – Solan under Sections 498A, 304B and 201 of IPC.
3. A perusal of the FIR indicates that the deceased had informed her mother abo
The court clarified that mere allegations of harassment are insufficient for conviction under Section 306 IPC; cogent evidence is required to apply the presumption of abetment under Section 113A of t....
(1) Abetment of suicide – In order to convict a person under Section 306 of IPC there has to be clear mens rea to commit offence – Mere harassment is not sufficient to hold accused guilty of abetting....
The conviction under Section 306 IPC requires clear evidence of instigation or active involvement leading to suicide, not mere demands for money.
The court ruled that mere marriage duration does not justify presumption of abetment of suicide; clear evidence of mens rea is required for conviction under IPC.
(1) There is nothing unnatural for a victim of domestic cruelty to share her trauma with her parents, brothers and sisters and other such close relatives. Evidentiary value of close relatives/interes....
Insufficient evidence of harassment or coercion to meet dowry demands does not establish cruelty under Section 498-A, nor does it support a conviction for abetment of suicide under Section 306.
In appeals against acquittal, the presumption of innocence prevails, requiring clear evidence of instigation or cruelty for a conviction under IPC sections concerning abetment of suicide.
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused's actions directly abetted the suicide, with evidence of cruelty being essential for conviction under IPC Sections 498-A and 306.
Court emphasized the necessity of establishing clear evidence of cruelty to invoke presumption of abetment of suicide under Section 113A of the Evidence Act, reinforcing the presumption of innocence ....
Without cogent evidence of harassment, the presumption of abetment of suicide under Section 113B of the Evidence Act cannot be invoked.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
