In cases of abetment of suicide, the prosecution must establish a direct or indirect act of incitement or intentional aid. Allegations of matrimonial discord are insufficient for conviction; there must be a proximate nexus between the accused conduct and the suicide to prove the offence of abetment.

JUDGMENT :

HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.

1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant – State of Gujarat (original complainant) under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 09/04/2007 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.4, Surat (hereinafter referred to as “the trial court”) in Sessions Case No.175 of 2005, whereby, the learned Trial Judge has acquitted the original accused respondent herein for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “the IPC”) .

2. The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under :

2.1 According to complainant Thakorbhai Lallubhai Patel, it is the case of prosecution that daughter of complainant namely, Tulsi had married with respondent accused by way of been love marriage and marriage life of deceased Tulsi was totally unhappy. It is further the case of the prosecution that respondent accused was not doing any activities and he was habitual drunkard. It is further the case of the prosecution that since from last two months from the date of incident, deceased Tulsi was serving with Essar Steel Co. and as house of complainant was very near from her company, deceased Tulsi was visiting her parental home during lunch hours as well as she was talking on telephone with complainant. It is further the case of the prosecution that as and when she was visiting her parental home, she was complaining regarding ill treatment and harassment caused by respondent accused on the ground of demand of money. It is further the case of the prosecution that many times, respondent accused had snatched away money from the hands of the deceased Tulsi. In spite of the aforesaid facts, complainant was giving money to her daughter, so that his daughter may not get harassment from respondent accused, even though respondent was not satisfied and he was causing harassment to deceased Tulsi as well as administering threat to cause death.

2.2 It is further the case of the prosecution that on 06/11/2004, while deceased Tulsi had visited the house of the complainant during lunch hours, deceased Tulsi had informed the complainant and his wife that Bhavesh was consuming liquor and after consuming liquor, she was beaten by the respondent. It is further the case of the prosecution that the respondent accused had also administered threat to bring money from her parents, otherwise he would kill her. It is further the case of prosecution that on 09/11/2004, at about 11.45 p.m., the elder daughter of the complainant had informed the complainant on telephone that house of Tulsi was closed and presence of bad smell was found from her house. Therefore, complainant alongwith his wife, his two sons and relatives had rushed to the house of the deceased Tulsi and found that Tulsi had committed suicide. Therefore, aforesaid complaint was filed before Rander Police Station for the alleged offence under Sections 498(A) and 306 of the IPC, vide CR No.I-274/2004.

2.3 On the basis of the said complaint, investigation was initiated and after thorough investigation, as there was sufficient evidence against the respondent accused, charge- sheet was filed in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Surat for the offence under Sections 306, 498(A) of IPC and as the offence committed by the accused was absolutely triable by the court of learned Sessions Judge, same was committed to the court of learned Sessions Judge for trial under Section 209 of Cr.P.C., where the respondent acc