IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA, J.
Swamy @ Sivakumar - Appellant
Versus
State, represented by its Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sathyamangalam Division, Erode. (Thalavadi P.S.Cr. No.125 of 2014) - Respondent
Crl. A. No.37 of 2017
Decided On : 06-11-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction under section 306 ipc involves examination of evidence leading to suicide. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. claims of ill-treatment and extramarital affairs require substantial evidence for conviction. (Para 4 , 5 , 7 , 9 , 12) |
| 3. prosecution must prove that accused actions were directly responsible for suicide. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. the appellate court found insufficient evidence to maintain conviction under section 306 ipc. (Para 24 , 25) |
JUDGMENT :
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA, J.
1. The Appellant is the sole Accused in S.C.No.120 of 2016 dated 28.12.2016 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Erode.
2. The Trial Court, vide impugned judgment in S.C.No.120 of 2016, dated 28.12.2016, has convicted the sole Appellant/Accused as follows:-
| Conviction under section | Sentence Awarded |
| Section 306 of IPC | To undergo ten years of rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default, to undergo two years of simple imprisonment. |
The Trial Court ordered the sentences to run concurrently and has also granted set-off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. for the period of incarceration undergone by the Accused during investigation/trial.
3. The Accused / Appellant challenging the legality of the conviction and sentence awarded by the Trial Court vide impugned judgment, has filed this Criminal Appeal.
4. The Prosecution case are briefly as follows:
a) The deceased, Bakkiya, is the daughter of P.W-1-Tmt.Suvarnamma and P.W-2-Thiru.Marappa. The marriage between the daughter of P.W-1 and P.W-2 and the son of P.W-7-Thiru.Mahadevappa, by name Sivakumar, was an arranged marriage. Both parties belonged to the Lingayat community. The marriage took place two years and four months prior to the daughter of P.W-1 and P.W-2 committing suicide. P.W-1 and P.W-2 were engaged in agriculture. They were residing in Udigala Village, Chamarajanagar, Karnataka. P.W-7- Thiru.Mahadevappa is a resident of Vazhaipalla Thottam, Panahalli Village, Byanapuram, near Thalavadi within Erode District, Tamil Nadu, engaged in agriculture.
b) After the marriage, Sivakumar the son of Thiru.Mahadevappa and the daughter of P.W-1 and P.W-2 lived in Panahalli Village happily. In the course of her matrimonial life, Bakkiya became pregnant. She delivered a girl child in the Byanapuram Government Primary Health Centre near Thalavadi. On hearing the news of the birth of the child, Sivakumar went to the hospital. After discharge from the hospital, P.W-1 and P.W-2 brought with them their daughter, Bakkiya, and grand daughter to their place of residence at Udigala Village, Chamarajanagar, Karnataka. After following the customary practices, the wife and daughter were brought to the matrimonial home by Sivakumar, son of Thiru.Mahadevappa. While so, three days prior to the alleged date of occurrence on 16.10.2014, there was a marriage in Udigala Village, Chamarajanagar, Karnataka, where Sivakumar, son of Thiru.Mahadevappa, went for the marriage along with the daughter of P.W-1 and P.W-2 and the newly born girl child. In the marriage function, Sivakumar, the Accused, informed her parents, P.W-1 and P.W-2, to take her with them, let her stay with them for 10 days, and then return to the matrimonial home. He also informed them that he was going to his maternal aunt's house. After three days, the daughter of P.W-1 and P.W-2 insisted P.W-1 and P.W-2 to take her to the matrimonial home. Accordingly, P.W-2- father of Bakkiya (deceased), took her and her newly born child to the house of P.W-7, along with P.W-5 and P.W-6. They convened panchayath regarding the domestic issues between the newly married couple, the daughter of P.W-1 and P.W-2 and the son of P.W-7. They also requested P.W-7 to look after the daughter of P.W-1 and P.W-2. After leaving her in the matrimonial home, P.W-1, P.W-2, P.W-5 and P.W-6 left for Udigala Village, Chamarajanagar, Karnataka. The next day, they were informed by P.W-7- Thiru.Mahadevappa, that the daughter of P.W-1 and P.W-2 committed suicid
K.V.Prakash Babu Vs. State of Karnataka
The absence of compelling evidence to prove that the accused abetted his wife's suicide led to the acquittal under Section 306 IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the impact of mental cruelty and instigation in cases of abetment of suicide, and the interpretation of relevant legal provisions such as Section 3....
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 ....
To establish an offence under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution must prove active instigation by the accused; mere allegations of infidelity without direct evidence of provocation or intent are insuff....
The court emphasized that convictions under IPC Sections 306 and 498A require proof of abetment or cruelty, upheld by consistent and reliable evidence, which was lacking in this case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must prove the intention of the accused to commit cruelty or abet suicide, and the evidence presented must be specific and cre....
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.