The main legal point established in the judgment is that while the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment by accused No. 1, there was insufficient evidence to prove abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC.

V. MOHTA ANOOP, J.

( 1 ) ALL these Appeals are arising out of a judgment and order dated 7th March, 1996, passed by the Sessions Judge, Raigad, alibag, whereby, appellant No. 1 (accused No. 1) in Criminal Appeal No. 163 of 1996 has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "ipc") and acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 304-B and 506 of the IPC. Accused Nos. 2 to 4 i. e. respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in Appeal No. 462 of 1996 filed by the State of maharashtra under Section 378 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short "cri. P. C. "), were acquitted. The State of Maharashtra has also preferred an Appeal under Section 377 (1) of the Cri. P. C. for enhancement of the sentence passed by the Sessions Judge against accused No. 1. All these Appeals have been heard together. Therefore, are being disposed of by this common Judgment.

( 2 ) AS per the prosecution the death of the deceased Manjeet Kaur occurred on 18-9-1992 at the house of the accused due to 100% burn injuries. Accused no. 1 is the husband of the deceased. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are the father and the mother of accused No. 1 respectively and accused No. 4 is his brother. P. W. 1 Kuldeepsing is the father and P. W. 4 Jeetkaur is the mother of deceased manjeet Kaur. P. W. 2 Sikandarsing is her maternal uncle and P. W. 3 preetamsing is her brother. These witnesses are residents of Ahmednagar. The accused are residing at Khopoli. The marriage of deceased Manjeet Kaur was celebrated on 2-2-1989 with accused No. 1 at Ahmednagar. After the marriage she was staying with her husband at Khopoli. Accused Nos. 1 to 4 were living at Khopoli as members of joint family. For the first six months after the marriage, the deceased had no complaints and was staying with the accused happily. After six months, accused started harassing the deceased by demanding cash amount of Rs. 50,000/- a Godrej cupboard and a refrigerator from her parents. P. W. 1, Kuldeepsing had been to the house of the accused to see his daughter the deceased Kaur, disclosed this fact to her father. On the very next day, accused No. 1 along with his friend Baban came to the house of his inlaws. At that time, the father of the deceased was not present in the house. His wife and sons were at the house. Accused No. 1 made demand of Rs. 50,000 /- them and gave threat to kill Manjeet in case his demand was not fulfilled and he left their house.

( 3 ) ON the very next morning, the mother Jeetkaur of the deceased rushed to Khopoli. She, alongwith the deceased Manjeet boarded the rickshaw to return back to Ahmednagar. Both were restrained on the road by all the accused. They assaulted her, as well as, the deceased. Immediately, they rushed to the Police Station and lodged complaint against the accused persons. With the help of Police they boarded the bus and reached to Ahmednagar.

( 4 ) AT that time the deceased was pregnant. After 4-5 days she begot a male child on 23-4-90. The message of delivery was sent to the accused persons by her parents, but none of the accused came to Ahmednagar to see newly born child. Since thereafter, she was staying at the house of her father. She had sent one notice to accused No. 1 alleging various harassments as referred above. Accused No. 1 replied the said notice and informed the deceased that she was at liberty to take any action against him.

( 5 ) THEREAFTER, the deceased filed a proceeding for maintenance bearing cri. Misc. Application No. 32/90 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, F. C. , ahmednagar. After hearing the parties, the learned Magistrate at Ahmednagar passed an order directing accused No. 1 to provide maintenance at the rate of rs. 200/- per month to the deceased and Rs. 150/- per month to their son. The said decision was unsuccessfully challenged by accused No. 1 by preferring revision petition in the Sessions Court, but not deposited the arrears of maintenance amount.

( 6 ) IN the month of June