Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
State, Through Secretary, GNCT of Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Ritu Raj Thakur, S/o. Sh. Anand Thakur – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. Appeal under Section 378 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C'), has been filed on behalf of the Appellant/State against the Order dated 10.02.2017 of learned ASJ-04, Delhi whereby the Respondent/Ritu Raj Thakur, has been acquitted under Section 498A/306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ' IPC ') in FIR No. 36/2011, registered at Police Station Pandav Nagar.
2. The brief facts are that Ms. Sharmistha and Accused, Ritu Raj Thakur, got married on 06.03.2010, according to Hindu Rites and Rituals. Ms. Sharmistha committed suicide on 01.02.2011 by hanging herself with a bed sheet with the ceiling fan at her matrimonial home/rented accommodation at H. No. 655, Pocket-V, Mayur Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi, leaving a suicide note in her diary.
3. The incident was recorded vide DD No. 32A dated 01.02.2011 at 22:50 hours in the Police Station Pandav Nagar, on receipt of telephone call from LBS Hospital wherein it was recorded that she was brought dead due to strangulation by her husband for which MLC No. 1025/11 was prepared. The investigations were taken over by SI Sehdev Singh, who collected the
The prosecution failed to prove cruelty or instigation linked to the suicide, resulting in acquittal under IPC Sections 498A and 306.
Point of law: Dowry harassment - Abatement of suicide =-evidence of prosecution witnesses on record does not demonstrate the unqualified clarity and conviction any role played by the accused in caus....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for a conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, there must be evidence of instigation or intentional aid by the accused to drive ....
Insufficient evidence of specific ill-treatment and lack of direct link to suicide led to the quashing of convictions under Sections 498-A and 306 of the IPC.
Conviction under sections 306 and 498-A RPC requires clear evidence of harassment and direct causation of suicide, which was not established in this case.
Cruelty – Every harassment does not amount to cruelty – What constitutes cruelty for one person may not constitute cruelty for another person.
Conviction under IPC Sections 498A and 306 requires clear evidence of cruelty and instigation, which was not established in this case.
Prosecution must establish clear intent and mens rea for abetment of suicide; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient for conviction under IPC.
For conviction under Sections 306 and 498A, clear evidence of instigation or aiding in suicide is essential; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient.
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
