The court emphasized that mere family disputes do not constitute abetment to suicide under IPC, and false evidence presented by complainants led to counter charges under IPC sections 181 and 182.

JUDGMENT :

Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.

1. This appeal is preferred against the impugned order no. 30 dated 30.05.2012 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Paschim Medinipur in Sessions Trial Case No. IV-Nov/2010 through which the Learned Sessions Judge made a complaint under Section 340 Cr.P.C., before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Medinipur for taking cognizance of the offence under Section 182 and Section 181 read with Section 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE against the PW-1 Monimala Day, PW-2 Shyamal Das and PW-5 Satya Prasad Dey.

2. Criminal appeal No. 392 of 2012 arose out of an application under Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure whereby the appellants expressed their grievance against the impugned order No. 30 dated 30.05.2005 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Paschim Medinipur in Sessions Trial Case No. IV-Nov/2010.

3. A complaint was received by the Kotwali Police Station which based on the same registered Kotwali P.S. Case No. 47/2010 dated 10.02.2010 under Section 306 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE against the opposite party/accused.

4. The aforesaid complaint precisely stated on 29th January, 2010 at about 01:30 P.M., the accused/opposite party lady assaulted Subhra Das, wife of Shyamal Das, when her husband was in Calcutta. The victim felt indignant and chagrined at such an assault in the presence of her adolescent child and at such an affront, ablazed herself. The son of the victim and the aged mother-in-law of the de facto complainant, i.e. appellant no.1 tried to save the victim thereby sustaining burn injuries. Initially the victim was admitted at Medinipur Medical College and Hospital and subsequently shifted to Nilratan Sarkar Medical College and Hospital and she expired on 02.02.2010. Instantly after the incident, the accused/opposite party left the house.

5. On conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet being No.199/10 dated 28.06.2010 was filed under Section 306 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE against the accused/opposite party to which she pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution cited 10 witnesses and exhibited certain documents.

7. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellants as the Amicus Curiae submitted as follows:-

i. PW-1/De-facto Complainant/Eye witness had clearly deposed the conduct of the accused person from the very date of her marriage with the family members till the date of the incident. She had clearly deposed the exact cause which led Smt. Shubhra Das to attempt suicide. She had further stated in details about the treatment which was meted out to the injured after the incident and the circumstances under which she died. She had further deposed the intention/motive of the accused in committing the chaos in the family and specifically the reason for committing the mental and physical torture upon the victim as she did not want her husband and children to stay in the same house. The victim was specifically targeted by her because of the fact that she was soft in nature and temperament. Her evidence tendered in the Examination-in-Chief could not be demolished in the cross-examination.

ii. The deposition of PW-2/Husband of the deceased corroborated the evidence of PW-1 without contradictions.

iii. The deposition of PW-3/son of the deceased/eye witness was in uniformity with the prosecution version with regard to the means-rea as also the actus-reus.

iv. The cross examination of PW-5, the husband of the accused c