Back
2022 Supreme(Tri) 396
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
T. Amarnath Goud, Arindam Lodh, JJ.
Partha Bhowmik - Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura - Respondent
Crl. A. (J) No. 35 of 2020
Decided On : 16-03-2022
J. Bhattacharjee, Advocate, for the Appellant; S. Ghosh, Addl. P.P, for the Respondents
Conviction under Sections 498A and 306 IPC requires clear evidence of intentional cruelty; absence of such evidence warrants acquittal.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 498A and 306 - Criminal appeal against conviction under dowry and abetment of suicide charges - Evidence insufficient for establishing physical or mental torture or instigation for suicide - High Court found no cogent evidence to support conviction - Judgment of Addl. Sessions Judge set aside. (Paras 11, 18, 21, 24)
(B) Burden of Proof - The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused willfully treated the victim in a way likely to drive her to suicide or caused fatal consequences. (Paras 14, 15)
Facts of the case:
The prosecution alleged that the appellant subjected his wife to mental and physical torture for dowry demands, leading her to commit suicide. The trial court convicted the appellant based on witness testimonies, but the defense claimed insufficient evidence of torture.
Findings of Court:
The evidence presented was insufficient to prove the charges of intentional cruelty or abetment of suicide. The trial judge's findings were not based on cogent evidence.
Issues: The main issues included whether there was sufficient evidence of cruelty and whether the accused's actions instigated the victim's suicide.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that in absence of clear evidence establishing cruelty or instigation, the conviction could not stand. The principle of benefit of doubt applies where evidence is not conclusive.
Result: Appeal allowed; the appellant acquitted on the benefit of doubt.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual context of the case and charges framed. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments contesting evidence and conviction. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. court's analysis of evidence regarding cruelty and abetment. (Para 9 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. judgment on acquittal due to benefit of doubt. (Para 22 , 23) |
| 5. final conclusion and order of the court. (Para 24) |
JUDGMENT
1. This criminal appeal, under Section 374 of Cr.P.C., is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, dated 06.03.2020, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sepahijala Judicial District, Bishalgarh in connection with Case No. ST(T-II) 09 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under Sections 498A/306 of IPC and thereby sentenced him to suffer RI for 3(three) years along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- for committing offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC and further sentenced to suffer RI for 10(ten) years for committing offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- with default stipulation.
2. Prosecution case, in short is that one Sri Amulya Nath Bhowmik of East Gokulnagar under Bishalgarh Police Station lodged a written complaint on 04.04.2015 before the O.C., Bishalgarh Women P.S. alleging that in the year 2009, his daughter Gita Nath Bhowmik got married with accused Partha Bhowmik as per Hindu rites and customs and in that marriage cash amount of Rs. 35,000/- along with furniture and other articles were given as bridal gift. After 5/6 months of the marriage, the accused along with his parents, namely, Nitai Bhowmik and Kanan Bala Bhowmik started torture both physical and mental on Gita Nath Bhowmik to fulfill their further demand of Rs. 50,000/- along with a motorbike. She informed the matter to her parents but they failed to fulfill the demand due to their poverty and as a consequence the accused persons subjected Gita Nath Bhowmik to unbearable torture to fulfill the aforesaid demand and he alleged that his daughter was compelled to commit suicide by hanging herself on account of torture inflicted by her husband and parents-in-law.
3. O.C., Bishalgarh Women P.S. on receipt of the written complaint registered Bishalgarh Women P.S. Case No. 01 of 2015 and entrusted the investigation to Women Sub-Inspector of Police, Smt. Shipra Das. After completion of investigation I.O. submitted charge-sheet against the accused Partha Bhowmik, Nitai Bhowmik and Smt. Kanan Bala Bhowmik for commission of offence punishable under Sections 498A/306/34 of IPC.
4. Cognizance was taken on the basis of the police report and in course of trial, learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sepahijala Tripura, framed charges against the accused appellant and his parents, namely, Nitai Bhowmik and Smt. Kanan Bala Bhowmik for commission of offence punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of IPC to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. In course of trial, prosecution examined 10(ten) witnesses and some material documents have been exhibited in support of their case.
6. After closure of the prosecution evidence, accused persons were separately examined under Section 313 , Cr.P.C. to which they stated that the prosecution case was false and declined to adduce any defence witness in their favour.
7. Learned Addl. Sessions Judge at the conclusion of trial acquitted the accused-parents-in-law of the deceased, namely, Nitai Bhowmik and Smt. Kanan Bala Bhowmik of the charges under Sections 498A/306 of IPC, but, convicted accused-husband Partha Bhowmik for commission of offence punishable under Section 498A/306 of IPC and sentenced him as aforestated.
8. Being aggrieved, the accused Partha Bhowmik filed the present appeal.
9. Heard Mr. J. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. S. Ghosh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent.
10. Learned counsel, Mr. J. Bhattacharjee appearing for the accused-appellant submits that there is
