Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
A.F.EANASY – Appellant
Versus
ANTONY XAVIER – Respondent
Crl.Rev.Pet/1289/2004
IPC - 498A & 306 - Section 34 IPC - The court analyzed provisions under Sections 498A and 306 of the IPC concerning cruelty and abetment to suicide, underscoring the necessity of establishing cruelty beyond reasonable doubt. The appellate court's conclusions on insufficient evidence for conviction were upheld.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved allegations against the accused for cruelty leading to the suicide of Jency, with claims of physical and mental torture post-marriage. Following an initial conviction, the appellate court acquitted the accused citing lack of evidence.
Issues: Whether the evidence presented sufficiently established the charges under Sections 498A and 306 IPC against the accused, particularly in regard to the standards of proof required in criminal law.
Ratio Decidendi: The appellate court reinforced that allegations of cruelty must demonstrate a clear link to the suicide for liability under Section 306, and mere disputes in marriage do not establish the gravity of cruelty necessary for conviction under IPC.
Final Decision: The criminal revision and appeal were dismissed, confirming the acquittal of the accused.
JUDGMENT
[ CRL.A.204/2005, Crl.Rev.Pet.1289/2004 ]
Dated this the 1st day of December 2020 ...
This Revision petition and Crl. Appeal are connected and therefore, I am disposing these two cases by a common judgment. The revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.1289/2004 is the prosecution witness No.1 in S.C. No.303/2001 on the file of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kochi. The revision is filed challenging the judgment dated 19.11.2003 in Crl.Appeal No.319/2003 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, (Adhoc-II), Ernakulam. The State also challenge the same judgment by filing Crl.Appeal No.204/2005. Therefore, I am disposing these two cases by a common judgment.
(hereinafter the parties are mentioned in accordance to their rank before the trial court). 2. The above case is chargesheeted by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Mattancheryy alleging offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 r/w Section 34 of the IPC against the two accused.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that on
18.2.1996, the first accused married Jency, daughter of PW1 at Jeevamatha Church, Mattancherry. They were residing at the house of the first accused. It is alleged after one year of the marriage, the first accused started to treat Jency with matrimonial cruelty by demanding more money and also by physically torturing her and subjecting her to mental torture as well. Consequent to the mental and physical torture, Jency had to be hospitalised and had also on a previous occasion attempted to put an end to her life by committing suicide. It is alleged by the prosecution that Jency committed suicide on account of the abetment from the accused and the suicide was on 26.3.2000 from a room inside the house of the first accused. Hence it is alleged that the accused committed the offence under Section 498A and 306 r/w Section 34 of the IPC .
4. To substantiate the case, the prosecution examined PW1 to PW17. Exts.P1 to P11 were also marked. Ext.D1 to D8 are the defence exhibits. Two witnesses were examined on the defence as DW1 and DW2. M.O.1 series were marked as material object. Ext.C1 is also marked as court exhibit.
5. After going through the evidence and documents, the trial court found that the accused Nos. 1 and 2 is guilty for the offence under Sections 498A and 306 IPC r/w Section 34 . The accused are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, accused are directed to undergo simple imprisonment for six months each for the offence under Section 498A r/w. Section 34 . The accused were also directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, they are directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each for the offence punishable under Section 306 r/w. Section 34 .
6. Aggrieved by the above conviction and sentence, the accused filed an appeal before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam. The appeal was considered by the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-II), Ernakulam in Crl.Appeal No.3191 of
2003.
7. After going through the entire oral and documentary evidence, the appellate court concluded that, the accused are not guilty under Sections 498A and 306 r/w. Section 34 IPC . The appellate court concluded that even if the entire prosecution evidence is accepted in toto, the offence under and 306 is not made out. Hence, the accused was acquitted.
8. Aggrieved by the above acquittal order, the prosecution witness No.1 filed the revision and the State filed the appeal.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. I also heard the learned counsel for the 1st and 2nd accused also.
10. The prosecution case is that there is mental and physical cruelty from the side of the accused and because of the same, the deceased Jency committed the suicide. I do not want to repeat the entire oral evidence adduced by the witnesses in this judgment because
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
