IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
SUDESH BANSAL, J.
Gopal and ors. - Accused-Appellants
Versus
The State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 54 of 1991
Decided on : 25-04-2024
ORDER :
Mr. Sudesh Bansal, J. - This appeal under Section 374 CrPC has been filed challenging the judgment dated 25.2.1991 in Sessions Case No.115/1990 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Jaipur whereby accused-appellants have been convicted for offence under Section 306 IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment, with fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further undergo one month rigorous imprisonment.
2. Heard counsel for appellant, learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record.
3. At the outset, it is note worthy that appellant accused No.1 Gopal has passed away during course of this appeal on 18.05.2016 and none of his surviving relatives have come forward to challenge his conviction, therefore, appeal on behalf of accused appellant No.1 Gopal stands abated as per Section 394 CrPC on account of his death. However, appeal for accused appellant No.2 Manphool Decvi survives, hence, legality and validity of conviction of accused appellant No.2 for offence u/s. 306 IPC is being considered on merits.
4. The factual matrix of the case is not in dispute that one lady namely Kamla locked herself in a room on 10.03.1988, poured kerosene oil on herself and set on fire, however, on hearing hue and cry, door was opened; flames were doused and she was taken to the hospital. On receiving the information, SHO of Police Station Kotwali, Jaipur reached hospital to record her statements. Duty Doctor certified at about 04:30 PM that Kamla is fit for giving statements, SHO recorded her statements on 10.03.1988 itself at about 04:30 PM. Looking to the condition of Kamla, her statements were recorded in question and answer form. Kamla divulged that since about last one month her husband and mother-in-law tortured her on account of having a doubt about her chastity, suspecting her illicit relations with her Jija and by saying that they will bring another woman in her place. On the basis of such statements, one FIR No.75/1988 was registered by the SHO for offence u/s. 498A IPC and investigation was commenced. During investigation, on the same day on 10.03.1988 in between 04:30 PM to 04:45 PM, Judicial Magistrate also visited to hospital to record statements of Kamla, who after getting certification from the concerned Doctor about fitness of Kamla for giving statements, recorded her statements in question answer form. Kamla answered the questions put forth by the Judicial Magistrate and divulged that she set fire on herself because of day-night sufferings. She replied the pin pointed questions of Judicial Magistrate and divulged that she was not harassed for demand of any dowry or other items, but in fact she told the basic reason, due to which she took step to end her life was that her husband and mother-in-law had a suspicion on her to have illicit relations with her Jija and she was being defamed by them levelling such allegation. Kamla disclosed that when her sister delivered a child, she went to Gujarat and stayed for about six months at the house of her Jija, therefore, on that count her husband and mother-in-law started to have doubt on her chastity and a day before the incident, they said to her that they will bring another wife, therefore, for that reason only, she locked herself in a room, poured kerosene on her head and set fire with matchstick. Thereafter, on the next date i.e. on 11.03.1988 Kamla died. Thereafter, police completed the investigation and charge-sheet for offence u/s. 498A and 306 IPC was filed against both accused appellants, who happens to be husband and mother-in-law of deceased Kamla. Since the offence u/s.306 is triable by the Court of Sessions, therefore, case was committed for trial to the Court of Sessions.
5. Prosecution make out a case against appellants to harass deceased Kamla for demand of dowry and subjecting her to cruelty in multiple ways and due to such sufferings, she committed suicide, hence, appellants were also booked for abetment to commit suicide. In su
Gangula Mohan Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2010) 1 SCC 750
Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2001) 9 SCC 618
AI
To convict under Section 306 IPC, clear mens rea and evidence of instigation must be established, which was not proven in this case.
To convict for abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of instigation or active involvement by the accused, which was not established in this case.
To establish abetment under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear intent and direct actions by the accused that compel the victim to commit suicide; emotional distress alone is insufficient.
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of the accused's intention to instigate the suicide, which was absent in this case.
Mens rea must be clearly established for abetment of suicide; the accused's intoxication and actions did not demonstrate intent to drive the victim to suicide, necessitating evaluation of multiple co....
To establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be direct acts of incitement closely linked to the suicide, and mere denial of marriage does not constitute abetment.
Section 306 in Indian Penal Code reads as abetment of suicide.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.