For a conviction under IPC Section 306, there must be clear evidence of instigation by the accused that led the victim to perceive suicide as her only option; vague claims of harassment are not sufficient.

JUDGMENT :

J. C. Doshi, J.

1. In Sessions Case No. 39 of 2010, the learned Additional Sessions Court, Gandhinagar by judgment and order dated 31.8.2012, acquitted the accused Visaji Natuji Bihola and Ushaben Visaji Natuji Bihola respectively father- in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, Sonalben Dilipsinh.

2. State of Gujarat being a premier prosecuting agency, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order in the Sessions Case, choses to file appeal, only against the accused Ushaben Visaji Natuji Bihola under Section 3 78 (1) (3) of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , by way of this appeal, however, did not choose to assail the judgment and order recording the acquittal of father-in-law Visaji Natuji Bihola .

3. Brief facts of the case are as under :

3.1 The deceased, Sonal Dilipsinh married to her husband and she was living separately with her husband and daughter Khushi in the upper floor of the matrimonial home. She gave her complaint on 13.1.2010 to the Dy. S.P, Gandhinagar in Krishna Hospital, Naroda, alleging that after a span of 4 months of the marriage, her mother-in-law started meting cruelty and harassed her on the grounds that her parents did not give anything as dowry. She had spoken about this to her husband but her husband remained silent and later on the harassment and cruelty was increased. She talked about the harassment and cruelty to her cousin Nitaben but since the harassment and cruelty continued upon Sonalben (deceased), she committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her body on 12.1.2010, as she could not bear harassment cruelty and abuse; the FIR of which has been registered on 13.1.2010. Sonalben, the complainant, died on 17.1.2010 and during the treatment period she had also given a dying declaration.

3.2 The FIR was registered for the offence punishable under Section 498 A, 504, 306 and 114 of IPC read with Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the father-in- law and mother-in-law namely Visaji Natuji Bihola and Ushaben Natuji Bihola. The usual investigation was carried, conducted and concluded and ultimately it leads to filing of the charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate. Since the offence is exclusively tried by the learned Sessions Court, it was committed by the learned JMFC. The Sessions Case No. 39 of 2010 was registered against the accused. The process was issued. The learned Sessions Court has framed the charge against the accused for the ofences punishable under Sections 498 (A), 504, 306 and 114 of the IPC and read with Sections 3 and 7 of the Prevention of Dowry Act. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and accordingly case was registered for leading the evidence of the prosecution side.

3.3 In order to bring home all the charge against the accused the prosecution led following oral and documentary evidence.