1. Appeal against acquittal under Sections 498A and 304B IPC for dowry death by suicide. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 22725
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Dinesh Bhatt, JJ
Ram Devi – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
CRL.A. 38/2018
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Rakhi Dubey(DHCLSC)
For the Respondents: Mr. Hitesh Valli, Mr. B.N JHA, Mr. Keshav Kumar Jha
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Rakhi Dubey(DHCLSC)
For the Respondents: Mr. Hitesh Valli, Mr. B.N JHA, Mr. Keshav Kumar Jha
Conviction under Section 306 IPC requires proof of a positive act of instigation or incitement with clear mens rea; mere matrimonial discord or emotional distress without direct provocation does not constitute abetment of suicide.
Headnote:(A) Abetment of Suicide - Section 306 IPC - Requirement of positive act - To sustain a conviction, there must be a clear mens rea and a positive act of instigation, provocation, or incitement that pushes the deceased to commit suicide; mere matrimonial discord, emotional frustration, or hypersensitivity to ordinary day-to-day differences does not constitute abetment. (Para 16, 17, 18)
(B) Dowry Death and Cruelty - Sections 304B and 498A IPC - Absence of evidence - Where a suicide note (dying declaration) does not mention any cruelty, harassment, or demands for dowry, the essential ingredients of these offences are not met, and the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act cannot be raised. (Para 7, 15)
Issues: Whether the acquittal of the accused under Sections 498A and 304B IPC was sustainable and whether the evidence available, including the suicide note and diary entries, was sufficient to convict the accused for abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- crime and sentencing
- practice and procedure
- family law
Table of Contents
2. Appellant argued case made out under Section 306 IPC; accused denied cruelty or abetment of suicide. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 )
3. Suicide note and diary entries showed affection, not incitement; no positive act of abetment to suicide established. (Para 12 , 13 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 )
4. Abetment of suicide requires positive act of instigation or incitement; mere emotional disappointment insufficient. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 )
5. Appeal dismissed; no interference required in acquittal of accused for dowry death and cruelty. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 )
6. What constitutes abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC?
Abetment requires a positive act of instigation, incitement, or intentional aid; mere emotional disappointment or matrimonial discord is insufficient. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 )
7. Can a suicide note expressing affection but disappointment support conviction for abetment of suicide?
No, such notes showing warmth and momentary frustration do not establish the positive incitement or compelling circumstances required for abetment of suicide. (Para 13 , 18 , 19 )
8. What is required to establish the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act for dowry death?
The prosecution must first establish essential ingredients of Section 304B IPC, including cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry soon before death. (Para 7 )
9. Is there a straitjacket formula for determining abetment of suicide?
No, each case is decided on its own facts; human sensitivity and suicidability patterns differ individually. (Para 16 , 17 )
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant under Section 378 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of India, 1973 (hereinafter, ‘Cr.P.C.’) assailing the judgment dated 22nd April, 2017 passed by the ld. Additional Sessions Judge, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 57014/2016. The present case arises out of FIR No. 191/2013 registered as PS. Vikas Puri.
3. Vide the impugned judgment, accused persons namely, Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sh. Rameshwar Dayal and Smt. Usha Devi were acquitted.
Brief Background
4. The background of the case is that the Victim namely, Smt. Kavita got married to Manoj Kumar on 23rd November, 2012. The said marriage is stated to be contrary to the wishes of the parents of the victim and she went to her matrimonial home after the marriage, where she lived with her husband and parents-in-law, namely Sh. Rameshwar Dayal and Smt. Usha Devi.
5. On 12th June, 2013, information was received that the Victim i.e., Kavita has committed suicide by hanging herself from the hook of the ceiling fan with a saree. Thereafter, she had been moved to the hospital where she was declared brought dead.
6. Subsequently, FIR No. 191/2013 dated 13th June 2013 was registered at P.S. Vikas Puri. The accused persons had pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. During the course of the trial, prosecution led evidence and 19 witnesses were examined including the sister of the victim. The Trial Court came to the conclusion that offences under Sections 498A and 304B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, ‘IPC’) were not made out.
7. According to the Trial Court, there is no evidence available on record to establish cruelty or harassment by the accused persons that too in connection with dowry. Reliance was placed by the Trial Court on the suicide note of the victim i.e., Ex. PW16/E which in effect constituted a dying declaration wherein she does not speak about any cruelty or harassment. Accordingly, the Trial Court acquitted the accused persons. The relevant portion of the impugned judgment reads as under:
“55. In view of the above-mentioned circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that there is no evidence available on record to indicate that the accused persons treated the deceased with cruelty after the marriage. There is no evidence available on record to establish that soon before her death, the deceased was treated with cruelty or harassment by the accused persons and that is too in connection with any demand of dowry. The suicide note Ex.PW-16/E which is relevant under Section 32 (I) of the Evidence Act being dying declaration, also does not speak about anything about the cruelty or harassment or demand of dowry by the accused persons. There is also no evidence available on record to suggest that the accused persons compelled the deceased in any manner whatsoever to take the extreme step of ending her life. Consequently, the prosecution could not establish or prove or show the essential ingredient of the offence punishable. under Section 304B IPC so as to raise presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act against the accused persons.The prosecution also could not establish that the deceased was treated with cruelty or was harassed in any manner whatsoever, by the accused persons so as to hold them responsible for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC. Furthermore, there is not a single evidence available on record to indicate any abetment by the accused persons, in any form, to compel the deceased to commit suicide so as to hold the accused persons responsible for commission of offence under Section 306 IPC. Since the prosecution failed to establish the essentials ingredients of offence under Section 304B IPC so as to raise the presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act, no question arises for rebuttal of such presumption by the accused persons. Consequently, the points for determi
