Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Pankaj Bhandari, J.
Murti Devi - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1393 of 2018
Decided On : 12-09-2018
ABETMENT TO SUICIDE - SECTION 306 IPC - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - COURT HELD THAT OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 306 IPC IS NOT MADE OUT IN THE ABSENCE OF POSITIVE ACT OF INSTIGATION OR AIDING.
Fact of the Case:
ACCUSED WAS CONVICTED UNDER SECTION 306 IPC FOR ABETTING THE SUICIDE OF HER DAUGHTER-IN-LAW. THE DECEASED HAD GIVEN A PARCHA BAYAN AND DYING DECLARATION STATING THAT THE ACCUSED HAD SLAPPED HER AND TOLD HER TO LEAVE THE HOUSE, WHICH LED HER TO COMMIT SUICIDE. THE ACCUSED APPEALED THE CONVICTION, ARGUING THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF INSTIGATION AND THAT THE DECEASED WAS HYPER-SENSITIVE.
Finding of the Court:
THE COURT HELD THAT THE EVIDENCE DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE ACCUSED HAD INSTIGATED OR AIDED THE DECEASED TO COMMIT SUICIDE. THE COURT RELIED ON THE TESTIMONY OF HOSTILE WITNESSES, INCLUDING THE DECEASED'S SISTER AND AUNT, WHO STATED THAT THE DECEASED WAS HYPER-SENSITIVE AND WOULD BECOME AGITATED OVER PETTY MATTERS. THE COURT ALSO NOTED THAT THE ACCUSED AND THE DECEASED WERE STAYING SEPARATELY, AND THAT THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THEM WAS A PETTY MATTER.
Issues: 1. WHETHER THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHED THAT THE ACCUSED INSTIGATED OR AIDED THE DECEASED TO COMMIT SUICIDE. 2. WHETHER THE DECEASED WAS HYPER-SENSITIVE AND WOULD BECOME AGITATED OVER PETTY MATTERS.
Ratio Decidendi: THE COURT HELD THAT ABETMENT TO SUICIDE UNDER SECTION 306 IPC REQUIRES A POSITIVE ACT OF INSTIGATION OR AIDING. THE COURT RELIED ON THE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS IN M MOHAN VS. STATE TR. DY. SUPDT. OF POLICE AND HEERA LAL AND ANR. VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN, WHICH HELD THAT OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 306 IPC IS NOT MADE OUT IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH AN ACT. THE COURT ALSO CONSIDERED THE EVIDENCE OF HOSTILE WITNESSES, WHO TESTIFIED THAT THE DECEASED WAS HYPER-SENSITIVE AND WOULD BECOME AGITATED OVER PETTY MATTERS. THE COURT CONCLUDED THAT THE DECEASED'S SUICIDE WAS NOT THE RESULT OF ANY ACT OF INSTIGATION OR AIDING BY THE ACCUSED.
Final Decision: THE COURT ALLOWED THE APPEAL AND ACQUITTED THE ACCUSED OF THE CHARGES UNDER SECTION 306 IPC.
JUDGMENT
Pankaj Bhandari, J. - Admit.
2. Record is received.
3. With consent of the parties, matter is taken up for final disposal.
4. Appellant has preferred this appeal aggrieved by judgment and order dated 07.07.2018, passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Alwar, whereby appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 306 of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, has been imposed on non payment of fine petitioner is to further undergo two months simple imprisonment.
5. In brief, the factual matrix of the case are that on 20.08.2017, deceased gave her parcha bayan Ex.P-18 to the effect that at 6:00 am in the morning, deceased went to the mines to give tea to her husband. A day prior to the incident brother-inlaw had a fight with her sister who also happens to be her sister in law, her brother-in-law kicked her husband. In the morning, her mother-in-law abused her, slapped her and told her to leave the house, on which she took petrol from motorcycle of her husband and set herself ablaze. On the said parcha bayan, police registered a case against the appellant and after due investigation submitted charge-sheet against the appellant.
6. Trial Court after hearing the charge arguments framed charges under Section 306 IPC against the appellant. Appellant denied the charges and sought trial, whereupon as many as twenty two witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution and thirty documents were exhibited. Appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 Trial Court after hearing the final arguments convicted the appellant under Section 306 of IPC and sentenced her as herein above mentioned, aggrieved by which the present appeal has been preferred.
7. It is contended by counsel for the appellant that offence under Section 306 IPC is not made out as there is no evidence that the appellant instigated the offence. It is also contended that from parcha bayan Ex.P-18 and dying declaration Ex.P-19, it is revealed that appellant-mother-in-law was staying separately. It is contended that all the witnesses produced on behalf of the prosecution including sister, uncle and aunt of the deceased have turned hostile. Court below has convicted the appellant only on the basis of dying declaration. It is also contended that Court below has overlooked the statement of PW-2 Manju, sister of the deceased who has also stated that her sister got angry on petty matters. She has also stated that she along with her husband is staying separately from the deceased and her husband and that her mother-in-law is also staying separately. Court has also ignored the statement of PW-16-Lalita, aunt of the deceased who has also stated that her niece remained mentally upset and would become agitated without any reason on the petty and small matters. She has also stated that she always remained very angry.
8. Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on " M Mohan vs. State Tr. Dy. Supdt. Of Police ", 2011 (3) SCC 626 and " Heera Lal and Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan", 2017 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 839 .
9. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal. His contention is that a dying person never lies. There was no reason why the deceased would implicate her mother-inlaw. It is also contended that the deceased in her dying declaration made before the Magistrate has stated that appellant, mother-in-law quarreled with the deceased and told her to leave the house. She has also stated that the mother-in-law was always quarreling with the deceased and she slapped the deceased in the morning due to which the deceased poured petrol upon her and set herself on fire.
10. I have considered the contentions.
11. All material prosecution witnesses in this case have turned hostile including sister, uncle and aunt of the deceased. Sister PW- 2 who happens to be material witness in this case has stated that her sister got angry on petty matters. She has also stated that no dispute took place between her m
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
