Point of Law: Section 306 of IPC which reads as abetment of suicide.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Instant appeal filed under S. 374 (2) CrPC lays challenge to judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.12.2021/29.12.2021, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Sirmaur at Nahan, Himachal Pradesh in Session Trial No. 25-N/7 of 2012, whereby learned court below, while holding appellant/accused (hereinafter, ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offence punishable under Ss. 306 and 201 IPC convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and pay fine of Rs.15,000/- under S.306 IPC and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month under each of the sections.

2. Briefly stated the facts as emerge from the record are that prosecution on the basis of statement made by PW-5, complainant under S.154 CrPC, who happens to be father of the deceased Deepali (hereinafter, ‘deceased’), Exhibit PW-5/A, lodged FIR Exhibit PW-16/C against the accused under S.306 and 201 IPC. In nutshell, case of the prosecution, as emerges from the record is that marriage inter se accused and deceased was solemnized as per Hindu rites and customs on 17.2.2009 at Satna in Madhya Pradesh. After marriage deceased was taken to village of accused i.e. Farida in Uttar Pradesh. Complainant alleged that deceased had done degree in B Pharma from Bhopal and thereafter she started working in some company in Baddi, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. Complainant PW-5 alleged that accused used to harass the deceased and he did not allow her to move outside the house or take up job. He alleged that earlier accused was working at Baddi and later shifted to Paonta Sahib, on 24.6.2010. He alleged that on 25.6.2010, deceased had informed him that accused had beaten and harassed her and thereafter between 12.00 noon and 1.00 pm accused informed that deceased has committed suicide. Complainant alleged that the deceased committed suicide after being harassed mentally and physically by accused as such he be dealt in accordance with law. In the aforesaid background, FIR came to be lodged against the accused.

3. After completion of investigation, police presented Challan in the competent court of law, which on being satisfied that a prima facie case exists against accused, charged him for commission of offences punishable under S. 306 and 201 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and pleaded trial.

4. Prosecution examined 17 witnesses to prove its case and led on record exhibits i.e. Exhibits No. PW-2/A suicide note, to prove its case against the accused, whereas, accused, despite opportunity failed to lead any evidence but in his statement recorded under S. 313 CrPC he denied the prosecution case in toto and claimed himself to be innocent. In his statement under S. 313 CrPC, deposed that the deceased was very ambitious and there was pressure on her from her parents to take up the job. He claimed before learned trial Court that deceased committed suicide due to pressure of her parents and nothing was done by him.

5. Learned trial Court on the basis of evidence led on record by prosecution held accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.306 and 201 IPC and convicted and sentenced him as per description given herein above. In the aforesaid back ground, accused has approached this court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for his acquittal after setting aside judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by learned court below.

6. Learned counsel for the accused, while making this court peruse the evidence led on record by prosecution vehemently argued that judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by learned court below is not sustainable in the eye of law being not based upon proper appreciation of evidence, as such, same, deserves to be quashed and set aside. Learned counsel for the accused further argued that there is no evidence worth credence suggestive of the fact that deceased committed suicide after being abetted/instigated by accused rather, she on account