Abetment under Section 306 IPC requires evidence of direct instigation and established mens rea; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient for conviction.

JUDGMENT :

G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant in S.C.No.357 of 2015 by judgment dated 02.11.2021 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Allikulam, Chennai, whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced to 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.15,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 3 months.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the appellant and the deceased Syed Sulthan Beevi was solemnized on 06.06.2004 as per the Mohammedan Laws and Customs. Out of wedlock, the couple had two daughters and were residing separately at a house in Velachery. From the time of marriage, the accused was not attending to any regular work and he did not support the family by contributing any income. The accused was mostly in a drunken state and harassed the deceased. The accused used to beat the deceased and due to the harassment, the deceased often went to her father’s and sister’s house to borrow money for her domestic expenses. On 07.04.2015, when the accused did not go for work and was at home, there was a quarrel with the deceased at around 2.00 p.m. The accused having been drunk, again quarrelled with the deceased, asked her to go and die and went to sleep. The deceased after bringing her daughters from the school, in view of the harassment and cruelty meted out by the accused, committed suicide by hanging herself with a saree.

3. On receiving the intimation about the death of his daughter, PW1 had visited the house of the deceased and lodged the complaint/Ex.P1. PW8/Sub Inspector of Police received the complaint and registered the FIR/Ex.P4 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. PW8/Sub Inspector of Police visited the place of occurrence and prepared the Observation Mahazar/Ex.P5 and Rough Sketch/Ex.P6 in the presence of witness/PW5. Thereafter, PW8 sent the body to Royapettah Government Hospital for postmortem. The saree/MO1 used to commit suicide was recovered by PW8 under Seizure Mahazar/Ex.P7 and then recorded the statements of PW1 to PW5. An Inquest was conducted by PW8 and prepared Inquest Report/Ex.P8. PW6/Doctor examined the body on being taken to the hospital and issued Accident Register/Ex.P2. PW7/ Doctor conducted the postmortem and issued Post-mortem Certificate/Ex.P3. PW8 thereafter altered the offence to Section 306 of IPC through the Alteration Report/Ex.P10.

4. The Investigating Officer took up the investigation and arrested the accused. On completion of the investigation, he filed a Final Report before the IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet. The learned Magistrate issued summons, complied with Section 207 Cr.P.C. and committed the case to the Principal Sessions Judge under Section 209 Cr.P.C. which was made over to the Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Allikulam, Chennai.

5. The trial court took up the case and on the appearance of the accused, framed charges under Section 306 IPC . When questioned, the accused pleaded not guilty and stood trial. The prosecution in order to prove the charges, examined 9 witnesses PW1 to PW9 and marked Exs.P1 to P10. On completion of the prosecution evidence, when the accused was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C on the incriminating material available, he denied the same as false and also offered an explanation that he had not committed any wrong and further, his wife had undergone an operation for Achalasia Cardia treatment, due to which she was not able to swallow solid food and she was under treatment. She