Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 69888
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M. NIRMAL KUMAR
S.MURUGANANTHAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE REP BY – Respondent
Crl.A.No.1164 of 2022 | Crl.M.P.No.4354 of 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M. Mohamed Saifulla
For the Respondents: J.R. Archana, Harshana T, K. Sudhakar
A penal amendment creating a new offence cannot be applied retrospectively; conviction under an amended section must be substituted with the original provision if the offence predates the amendment. Abetment of suicide may be proved by circumstantial evidence of caste-based harassment leading to self-immolation.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 306 and 498A - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(x) (as originally enacted) and Section 3(2)(va) (inserted by Amendment Ordinance, 2014) - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374 - Appeal against conviction - Abetment of suicide - Cruelty by husband - Caste-based humiliation - Self-immolation by wife - Retrospective operation of penal statute: Amendment to Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act came into force on 04.03.2014; offence committed in 2013 cannot be penalised under the amended provision - Dying declaration: In the absence of a recorded dying declaration, conviction may be sustained on unimpeachable circumstantial evidence including independent eyewitnesses and medical evidence - Sentence modification: Despite conviction confirmed, sentence for Section 306 IPC reduced from ten years to five years considering appellant’s conduct in taking deceased to hospital and good behaviour in open prison - Conviction under Section 3(2)(va) set aside and substituted with conviction under Section 3(1)(x) of the original Act (Paras 20-22).
(B) Evidence - Poisonous substance rule - Not applicable; court relied on testimony of neighbours (PW2, PW3, PW6, PW7) who confirmed that on the fateful morning appellant abused the deceased by calling her caste name in public view, leading to her immediate self-immolation - Medical evidence (PW10, PW13, Exs.P6 & P12) confirmed death due to septicemia from burn injuries - The cumulative evidence established proximate causal link between appellant’s conduct and suicide (Paras 17-20).
(C) Appeal - Scope - Appellate court may modify sentence on facts; no perversity in conviction but sentence altered based on mitigating circumstances (Para 20).
Facts of the case:
The appellant and the deceased (wife) belonged to different communities (appellant - Backward Class; deceased - Scheduled Caste). They had a love affair, eloped, and married, with a child born. On 27.11.2013, a quarrel occurred in the morning during which the appellant allegedly abused the deceased using her caste name. The deceased locked herself in the house, self-immolated, and suffered 100% burns. Neighbours extinguished the fire and rushed her to hospital; the appellant accompanied her. She died nine days later. The father of the deceased lodged a complaint. The trial court convicted the appellant under Sections 306, 498A IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Amendment Ordinance, 2014. The High Court heard the appeal.
Findings of Court:
The evidence of independent neighbours (PW2, PW3, PW6, PW7) clearly established the appellant’s caste-based abuse and harassment on the day of the incident, which constituted abetment of suicide and cruelty. Medical evidence corroborated the cause of death. However, the offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act (Amendment 2014) occurred in 2013 when the amendment was not in force; hence that conviction was set aside and replaced with conviction under Section 3(1)(x) of the original 1989 Act. The sentence for Section 306 IPC was reduced from ten to five years, while the sentence for Section 498A was confirmed. All sentences to run concurrently. The appellant was ordered to be released forthwith unless required in other cases.
Issues: 1. Whether the conviction under Section 306 IPC and Section 498A IPC is sustainable on the evidence? 2. Whether the conviction under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Amendment Ordinance, 2014 is legally valid given the offence date? 3. Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court should be modified?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that abetment of suicide can be proved by direct eyewitness testimony of neighbours who heard the deceased being abused with caste slurs moments before self-immolation, coupled with medical evidence of burn injuries. A penal amendment cannot be applied retrospectively to an act committed before its enactment. The court substituted the conviction under the inapplicable amended provision with the corresponding original provision. Sentence reduction was justified by the appellant’s subsequent humane conduct and good prison record. Result : Criminal Appeal disposed of with modifications - conviction under Section 306 IPC confirmed but sentence reduced to 5 years; conviction under Section 498A IPC confirmed; conviction under Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Amendment Ordinance set aside and appellant convicted under Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act, 1989 and sentenced to 5 years; all sentences to run concurrently; appellant to be released forthwith. Connected miscellaneous petition closed. (Para 23)
JUDGMENT
Challenging the impugned judgment dated 02.09.2021 in Special S.C.No.6 of 2015 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur (trial Court), this Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant.
2.The conviction and sentence of the trial Court imposed against the appellant are as follows:
For offence under Section 306 IPC, the appellant sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo one year Simple Imprisonment.
For offence under Section 498(A) IPC, the appellant sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo one month Simple Imprisonment.
For offence under Section 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance, 2014, the appellant sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo one year Simple Imprisonment.
3.Since no one represented on behalf of appellant, this Court directed the appellant to be produced through virtual mode and the appellant submitted that he does not know the reason for earlier Advocate's non appearance and requested for appointment of Legal Aid Counsel. Hence, this Court by order dated 16.10.2025 appointed Mr.Mohamed Saifulla as Legal Aid Counsel for the appellant.
4.Gist of the prosecution case is as follows:
(i)The deceased Vidhya and appellant are spouses. The 2nd respondent/defacto complainant/PW1 and PW5 are father and brother of the deceased. The deceased belongs to Hindu-Paraiyar community which comes under Scheduled Caste and appellant belongs to Hindu-Kammalar community which comes under Backward Class. Two years prior to the fateful day st (27.11.2013), the deceased, who was studying B.A., English 1 Year in Venkateshwara College, Peravurani, developed love affair with the appellant, a Carpenter, hails from Perumagalur village. Both the appellant and deceased eloped, got married and living as husband and wife in Tiruppur, one year after the marriage, blessed with a girl baby named Visalakshi. After the elopement, PW1 lodged a complaint but not further pursued the complaint. Later when the deceased was pregnant, admitted for delivery, the same informed to PW1. PW1 and his wife came to Tiruppur Government Hospital, enquired their daughter, who informed that the deceased was constantly harassed and humiliated by the appellant and the appellant consumed daily, abused and discriminated her by calling her caste name.
(ii)On 26.11.2013, PW1 received information that his daughter/deceased was self-immolated and taking treatment in Government Hospital, Tiruppur. Immediately, PW1 and his wife rushed to the hospital and saw their daughter in a burnt stage. On the same day, at 09.00 p.m., PW1 went to the respondent Police Station and lodged a complaint (Ex.P1). PW9, Inspector of Police received the complaint (Ex.P1), registered FIR (Ex.P5) in Crime No.795 of 2013 for offence under Section 498(A) IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the appellant at 10.00 p.m. Since the offence involved under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Tiruppur City by proceedings (Ex.P8) dated 28.11.2013 authorized the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Tiruppur South Range, Tiruppur City/PW12 to conduct investigation.
(iii)On getting authorization, PW12 took up investigation, visited the scene of occurrence, prepared Observation Mahazar (Ex.P2), Rough Sketch (Ex.P12), seized the material objects (MO1 to MO4) under the cover of Seizure Mahazar (Ex.P3), examined the neighbours/eye witnesses viz., PW2, PW3, PW6 & PW7 and found that on 27.11.2013 at 07.00 a.m, the appellant picked up fight with the deceased, abused and insulted her by calling her caste name. Unable to bear any further, the deceased went inside the house, locked the door from ins
