Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires proof of direct instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid in suicide; generalized harassment allegations without proximate acts inciting suicide are insufficient.

JUDGMENT :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. The appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surendranagar, Limdi Camp (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Sessions Case No. 75/2007 on 04.12.2008, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 306 , 498A and 114 of IPC .

1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as “the accused” as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:

2.1 The accused no. 1 is the husband, accused nos. 2, 3 and 6 are the brothers-in-law, accused no. 5 is the mother- in-law and accused nos. 4 and 7 are the sisters-in-law of deceased Kamlaben who was married to the accused no. 1 on 17.01.2006. On 17.05.2007, deceased Kamlaben Babubhai went into the toilet situated outside of the house and arranged pieces of dung cakes and wooden pieces on the floor of the toilet and sprinkled kerosene on herself and on the dung cakes and wooden pieces and set herself ablaze after closing the iron door of the toilet. The children nearby found smoke and fire emitting from the toilet and informed the in-laws of the deceased residing in the village and they came and informed the police and found that she was burnt completely. The complainant Bhagwanbhai Khetabhai Rathod - the father of the deceased filed a complaint that his daughter Kamla was being harassed by the accused and hence, she committed suicide due to the harassment of the accused and the offence was registered under section 306, 498A and 114 of the IPC which was registered at Muli Police Station I - C.R. No. 45 of 2007.

2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a charge- sheet came to be filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Muli and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Surendranagar, Limdi Camp as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Sessions Case No. 75/2007.

2.3 The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code and a charge at Exh. 6 was framed against the accused and the statement of the accused were recorded at Exhs. 7 to 13, wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.4 The prosecution produced the following evidence to bring home the charge against the accused.

ORAL EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

2.5 After the learned APP filed the closing pursis, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. After the arguments of the learned APP and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned Trial Court by the impugned judgement and order was pleased to acquit the accused from the charges levelled against them.

3. Being aggrieved a