IMPORTANT POINT
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or encouragement by the accused, which was not proven in this case.

JUDGMENT :

1. The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 1.5.2003 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh in Sessions Trial No.227 of 2001, whereby the Appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under:

2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that Saraswati, wife of Amrikan/Appellant No.1, was beaten and abused by the Appellants with the allegation that she did not know cooking food and this torture led her to commit suicide by hanging herself at Village Kerakachhar between 24th and 25th April, 2001. Her marriage was solemnised with Appellant No.1 Amrikan 5-6 years before the incident. Appellants No.2 and 3 are mother-in-law and elder sister-in-law of the deceased, respectively. Gauna (a post marriage farewell ceremony) of the deceased was performed one year prior to the incident during Dussehra festival and she had come to her matrimonial house at Village Kerakachhar. On 24.4.2001, Ramnaresh (PW1), uncle of the deceased visited her at her matrimonial house at Village Kerakachhar. At that time, she told him that her husband Amrikan used to beat her without any reason. Later, he came to know that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. He reported the matter in Police Station Shankargarh. Morgue (Ex.P1) was registered. Dead body was sent for post mortem examination. Post mortem report is Ex.P5. During investigation, evidence were collected and statements of witnesses were recorded. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the Appellants. The Trial Court framed charge against them.

3. In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as 7 witnesses. In examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Appellants pleaded false implication. No witness was examined in their defence.

4. On completion of the trial, the Trial Court convicted and sentenced the Appellants as mentioned in first paragraph of this judgment. Hence, the instant appeal.

5. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants submitted that the Trial Court failed to consider that there was hardly any reliable evidence on record to warrant the conviction of the Appellants.

The prosecution has not been able to establish a case against the Appellants under Section 306 IPC. The Trial Court ought to have considered that most of the prosecution witnesses, being relatives of the deceased, are interested witnesses. There are material discrepancies in their statements. The allegations levelled relating to abetment are, in fact, common disputes which almost occur in every family and it would not be correct to say that due to such disputes the deceased hanged herself. The prosecution has not been able to establish any abetment against the Appellants. Hence, the Appellants deserve acquittal.

6. Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposed the arguments raised on behalf of the Appellants. It was submitted that the Trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the Appellants.

7. I have heard the rival contentions put-forth on behalf of the parties and perused the entire material available with due care.

8. Post mortem examination over dead body of Saraswati was conducted by Dr. Joseph Lakra (PW4). Post mortem report is Ex.P5 in which he found that cause of the death was asphyxia due to hanging and nature of the death was suicidal.

9. It is quite clear from the prosecution evidence that deceased Saraswati was married to Appellant No.1 Amrikan alias Ambika Prasad about 6 years before the year 2001. Her mother-in-law is Appellant No.2 Samajhnibai and elder sister-in-law is Appellant No.3 Jasoda alias Jaswa. The Gauna ceremony took place about a year before