To convict under Section 306 IPC, prosecution must prove abetment under Section 107 – instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid with mens rea. Mere cruelty or harassment without direct act leading to suicide is insufficient.

Judgment on Board

02.01.2026

1. This appeal against acquittal has been preferred by the Appellant/State, arising out of the judgment dated 24.02.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, North Bastar Kanker, C.G., in Sessions Trial No.109/2014, whereby the learned trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent herein of the charge under Section 306 Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC').

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that marriage of deceased- Saraswati Rana was solemnized with accused-respondent in May, 2013 according to their customs. After the marriage, deceased- Saraswati Rana joined the company of the accused-respondent and started residing at her matrimonial home. It is alleged that accused/respondent was addicted to alcohol and under its influence, subjected the deceased to continuous physical and mental cruelty. Being fed up with the persistent ill-treatment made by the accused- respondent, deceased, in the intervening night of 8-9^th July, 2014, committed suicide by hanging herself from the ceiling of her house. Thereafter, merg intimation (Ex.P-8) was recorded and an FIR (Ex.P-10) was registered against the accused/respondent. Inquest proceedings were conducted vide Ex.P-2 and the dead body of the deceased was sent for postmortem examination. PW-7 Dr. D.K. Kashyap conducted the postmortem examination and submitted his report vide Ex.P-3, opining that the cause of death of deceased was asphyxia as a result of hanging and that the nature of death was suicidal. During investigation, spot map was prepared, statements of the witnesses were recorded and accused/respondent was taken into custody vide Ex.P-11.

3. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the accused/respondent before the competent trial Court under Section 306 of IPC. The accused/respondent denied the allegations, pleaded not guilty and prayed for a trial.

4. The trial Court, after hearing counsel for the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, by the impugned judgment acquitted the accused/respondent herein of said charge leveled against him.

5. Learned counsel for the Appellant/State submits that the learned trial Court is unjustified in acquitting the accused/respondent herein of said charge by recording perverse findings. He further submits that the evidence available on record clearly shows that the accused/respondent was addicted to alcohol and under its influence, used to harass and assault the deceased and on account of which, she committed suicide by hanging herself and the said fact is also evident from the statements of PW-1 Ashwini Gaanwar, father of the deceased, PW-2 Sabat Bai, mother of the deceased and PW-3 Abhimanyu, uncle of the deceased (Bade Papa) and despite such cogent and clinching evidence, the learned trial Court, without appreciating the material on record in its proper perspective, committed a grave error in acquitting the accused/respondent. Thus, the impugned judgment of acquittal suffers from perversity and illegality and is, therefore, liable to be set aside.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the accused/respondent supports the impugned judgment and submits that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused/respondent, in any manner, instigated or abetted the deceased to commit suicide. He further submits that during the merg inquiry and inquest proceedings, the father of the deceased (PW-1) and the uncle of the deceased (PW-3 – Bade Papa) were present; however, they did not lodge any complaint or make any allegation against the accused/respondent to the effect that, under the influence of liquor, he used to harass, pressurize, or assault the deceased, due to which, she allegedly committed suicide by hanging herself, which clearly demonstrates that the accused/respondent is not the author of the crime in question. He also submits that after the marriage, the deceased and the accused/respondent were living happily and she frequently used to visit her parental home along wi