N.K. Balakrishnan, J.

1. The sole accused in Session Case No. 237/2005 of Additional District and Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta, who was convicted and sentenced for offences under section 498A of I.P.C., is the appellant. Charge sheet was laid for offence under section 306 of I.P.C as well. But the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused of that offence. For the offence under section 498A, she was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to simple imprisonment for six months. This appeal is directed against the said conviction and sentence.

2. Deceased Joby was married by Reji, the son of the appellant, on 16.5.2002. She was given gold ornaments and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- at the time of marriage. She was staying happily in her matrimonial home till her husband Reji left for Saudi Arabia. He told her that he will return within one year and then it was stated that he will come after one and a half years and ultimately he was to return on the expiry of two years. However, the husband (Reji) could not come back within two years. The deceased was staying in the matrimonial home along with the mother (appellant), father and sister of Reji.

3. According to the prosecution, the appellant subjected the deceased to mental cruelty by making her do all the household work by herself. She was to collect grass for the cow; they also asked her to bring water from the “Oli”. She was also made to wash the cloths of her father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, who were residing in the house. The appellant used to find fault with the deceased for all works and actions done by her. She was not allowed to have free phone calls to her husband stating that phone bill would increase and that if she wanted to talk more, she should bring more money from her house. Thus, according to the prosecution, the mental cruelty meted out to the deceased was intolerable and because of the cruel treatment mentioned above, she committed suicide by hanging.

4. Inquest was conducted by the Tahsildar as per the instruction given by the R.D.O. Thereafter, postmortem examination was conducted. The gold ornaments worn by the deceased were seized. The inquest report and mahazar were produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate Court, Thiruvalla. The F.I. Statement was given by the brother of the deceased's father. Based on the statement given by the mother of the deceased and others, a report was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ranny. A report was filed subsequently incorporating commission of offences under sections 498A and 306 of I.P.C. After conducting investigation, charge sheet was laid alleging commission of offences as mentioned above.

5. PWs 1 to 14 were examined and Exhibits P1 to P17 were marked. Ext. D1 is the marked portion of the contradiction in the statement given by PW5. M.O.1 and M.O.2 series were also produced and marked.

6. The trial court, after considering the entire evidence, found that the appellant, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased, subjected the deceased to cruelty and that it was because of that cruelty the deceased committed suicide. However, the trial court found the appellant not guilty of the offence under section 306 of I.P.C., but found guilty only of the offence under Sec. 498 A of IPC. That is challenged in this appeal.

7. The point for consideration is: Whether there was any willful conduct on the part of the appellant which was of such a nature as was likely to drive the woman (deceased Joby) to commit suicide or whether there was any harassment of deceased Joby with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security ?

8. The prosecution has mainly relied upon the evidence of PWs 1 to 5 to sustain the charge of mental cruelty imputed against the deceased. Besides, the prosecution relied upon Ext.P2 letter which was found on the bed of the deceased at the time of her