IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.
Satishkumar – Appellant
Versus
State Represented by the Inspector of Police, Salem – Respondent
Crl.A. No. 314 of 2019
Decided On : 29-06-2022
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374 – Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 498A and 306- Cruelty and harassment – Demand of Dowry – Conviction upheld – Whether accused instigated the deceased to commit suicide – suicide note - Husband is the accused and the death of the victim is within seven years and therefore, this Court has to decide whether the presumption under Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act applies - Both physical and mental cruelty, committed on various occasions, has been demonstrated. The same is also corroborated by the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2. The statement of the mother of the accused in the R.D.O enquiry also confirms that on previous occasion, P.W.1, father of the deceased, had complained to her about the cruelty and the mother of the accused herself had stated that the father can complain to the Police in such a case. Therefore, these evidence cumulatively prove that the appellant/accused committed cruelty on the victim both physically and mentally – Appeal partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence passed against the appellant under Sections 498A and 306 of I.P.C, dated 02.02.2019 in S.C.No.214 of 2013 by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Salem and acquit the appellant.)
1. The appellant stood trial before the Mahila Court, Salem in S.C.No.214 of 2013 for two charges, that is, under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The first charge against the petitioner is that the appellant got married to the deceased Kavita on 16.04.2008 with dowry of 110 sovereigns of jewels, Rs.4,00,000/- of money for purchase of Car, Rs.60,000/- towards making jewels and after marriage, when the appellant and the deceased Kavita were residing at Door No.2/167, E.C.G.Nagar, Periyaputhur, within the limits of Azhagapuram Police Station, the appellant, on account of his illicit relationship with one Padma, even before the marriage and even after 1¼ years of birth of a child Mithun, the appellant/accused again had relationship with said Padma and when the said Kavita questioned about the same, the appellant/accused hit Kavita as well as the child, Mithun and broke the hands of Kavita and abused her by stating that there is no use of Kavita being alive and better die or if the said Kavita is alive, he would end her and in the same manner, repeatedly committed cruelty and therefore, committed an offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
2. In continuation thereof, on 27.04.2011, unable to bear the torture of the accused, the said Kavita committed suicide by hanging herself and died on account thereof and therefore, since the cruelty of harassment is the reason instigating her to commit suicide, the accused is punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The above charges came to be framed because on 27.04.2011, when, P.W.13, Manokaran, the Inspector of Police was on duty at Azhagapuram Police Station, P.W.1, namely Chidambaram, came to the Police Station and lodged a complaint to the effect that he got her daughter married to the appellant/accused on 16.04.2008 with the jewelry and money, as mentioned in the charge above and the child, Mithun, was born on 06.04.2009 and the appellant/accused had illicit relationship with several women and he had developed close relationship with one Padma working with him in the college and eight months before, in an inebriated mood, he had hit her daughter resulting in fracture of her arm and she had to be admitted in London Ortho Hospital and operated upon and on 27.04.2011, when he came on the request of the mother of the appellant/accused to Ponnamapet temple festival, he first came to her daughter's house at about 3.00 P.M and at that time, his daughter complained him that on the previous day, the appellant/accused had hit her and tortured her and broke her Cellphone and stating so, she cried and she gave letter containing a few pages, which he put it in his pocket without reading it and with his grandson he proceeded to the mother's place of the appellant/accused for the temple festival and again when he came back at about 4.15 P.M, the door was open. When he saw inside the computer room, his daughter was seen hanging in the fan and he immediately raised alarm and all the neighbours came. He saw an injury in the leg of his daughter and therefore, he suspects that his son-in-law would have beat her to death and requested to take action on the appellant/accused.
4. On the said complaint, the First Information Report was registered in a Crime No.500 of 2011 initially under the provisions of Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thereafter, upon receipt of the report of the Revenue Divisional Officer, the case was altered into one under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and P.W.14 took up the case for investigation and completed the investigation and laid a charge-sheet, proposing the appellant/accused guilty for the offences under Section
The prosecution must prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, and the absence of mens rea or guilty motive to instigate or abet the victim is crucial in cases of abetment of suicide.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on the dying declaration and oral evidence to prove the accused's instigation and cruelty, leading to the finding of guilt for both ch....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for a conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, there must be evidence of instigation or intentional aid by the accused to drive ....
Conviction under IPC Sections 498A and 306 requires clear evidence of cruelty and instigation, which was not established in this case.
Conviction under Section 306 requires proof of direct or indirect acts of instigation or incitement by the accused, proximate to the suicide, demonstrating a clear mens rea to abet the act. Mere hara....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while the appellant was found guilty of the offence under section 498A of the IPC, there was no evidence of positive action by the accused lea....
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.