The judgment established the importance of specific charges and the distinction between different offences under the Indian Penal Code.

JUDGMENT :

Appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 27th July, 2004 passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Sessions Trial No. 325/03, convicting him under section 509 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to simple imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 5,000/-.

2. In short, the prosecution case is that Anuradha Patwa (deceased) was neighbour of accused. According to her, accused used to tease her, he used to throw stones on her house after consuming liquor. About two months before, the present occurrence, he had beaten her husband also. When she lodged the report with the police, he increased his activities. On 16-10-2003 in the night again he pelted stones on her house after consuming liquor. Being annoyed and frustrated, Anuradha Patwa consumed poison. She was taken to hospital. When she recovered, she was brought back to her house, but on 19-10-2003, she died. On the report police registered the case under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused. After investigation charge-sheet was filed and the case was put up for trial.

3. Trial Court framed the charge under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Prosecution examined Lalchand Shakya (PW1), Ramesh Kumar Patwa (PW2), Kaliram Raghuwanshi (PW3) and Krishnakant Soni (PW4) who stated that Anuradha Patwa committed suicide by consuming poison. Trial Court relying on the statement of deceased (Ex. P/5), recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure treating the same as dying declaration, held the accused guilty under section 509 of the Indian Penal Code. Since on the basis of evidence on record, in view of the trial Court, the ingredients of offence under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code were not made out, accused was acquitted of the charge under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the offence under section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is not the minor offence of offence under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The ingredients of two offences are altogether different. Since no charge under section 509 of the Indian Penal Code was framed by the trial Court, the conviction of the accused for that offence is illegal and deserves to be quashed.

6. Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code provides that if any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. The essential ingredient of the offence under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code is "abetment" which has been defined in section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. It provides that a person abets the doing of a thing, who instigates any person to do that thing or engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing or intentionally aids, or makes wilful misrepresentation etc. to do that thing, whereas the section 509 of the Indian Penal Code provides the punishment for a person who intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman.

7. On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions, it is clearly borne out that ingredients of the two offences are materially different. Since the ingredients of two offences are different, the accused could not have been convicted under section 509 of the Indian Penal Code in the absence of specific charge against him.

8. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed. The conviction of the accused/appellant under section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is set aside. He is acquitted. The appellant is on bail, his bail bond and surety bond shall stand discharged. The amount of fine if, deposited shall be refunded to him.