Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the acquittal of the respondent-accused, Babasaheb @ Krishnat Durgappa Powar, for offences under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The respondent was married to the deceased Kamal in June 1995. According to the prosecution, Kamal was subjected to cruelty and harassment by the respondent, who allegedly assaulted her and threatened to remarry if she died. She also claimed to have seen the respondent sleeping with his sister-in-law. Kamal died by suicide on 22nd December 1995. The trial court acquitted the respondent, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence, including the testimony of the deceased's father (PW-3) and other witnesses. The court noted that the allegations of cruelty were vague and uncorroborated. There was no evidence of any direct instigation by the respondent to commit suicide. The court also observed that the presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act could not be invoked as the foundational facts of cruelty were not established. The High Court held that the trial court's findings were not perverse and that the appeal lacked merit. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Abetment to Suicide - Section 306 IPC - Ingredients of abetment - The prosecution must prove that the accused instigated, engaged in conspiracy, or intentionally aided the deceased to commit suicide. Mere allegations of cruelty or harassment without direct evidence of instigation are insufficient to sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC. Held that the evidence on record did not establish any act of instigation by the accused (Paras 10-15). B) Criminal Law - Cruelty by Husband - Section 498A IPC - Definition of cruelty - Cruelty must be willful conduct likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury. Isolated incidents of harassment or vague allegations without corroboration do not meet the threshold. Held that the prosecution failed to prove cruelty beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 16-20). C) Evidence Law - Presumption as to Abetment of Suicide - Section 113A Evidence Act, 1872 - Conditions for presumption - The presumption under Section 113A arises only if the prosecution first proves that the deceased committed suicide within seven years of marriage and that the accused subjected her to cruelty. In the absence of credible evidence of cruelty, the presumption cannot be invoked. Held that the trial court correctly declined to apply the presumption (Paras 21-25). D) Criminal Procedure - Appeal against Acquittal - Section 378 CrPC - Scope of interference - The appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the findings are perverse or unreasonable. If two views are possible, the view favoring the accused should be adopted. Held that the trial court's findings were plausible and not perverse (Paras 26-30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the respondent for offences under Sections 498A and 306 IPC was perverse and liable to be set aside.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal dated 30th June 1997 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur in Session Case No. 206 of 1996 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Abetment to suicide requires direct or indirect act of instigation
- Section 306 IPC
- Section 498A IPC
- cruelty
- presumption under Section 113A Evidence Act
- standard of proof in appeal against acquittal
