Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment of the IInd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad, at Alibag in Sessions Case No. 35 of 2002, which acquitted the respondents, Ramesh Damodar More and Sou Jyoti Ramesh More, of the offence under Section 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case arose from the suicide of Priya, the wife of the brother of accused No.1 Ramesh, who drowned herself in a well on 19th November 2001. The prosecution alleged that the respondents provided ill-treatment to the deceased at her matrimonial home, which drove her to commit suicide. After the incident, the Police Patil of village Lonare gave intimation, leading to the registration of AD No. 50 of 2001. Investigation included spot panchnama, inquest panchnama, post-mortem, and recording of statements. The mother of the deceased, Bharati (PW1), and father, Bhaskar (PW2), were examined. The prosecution examined five witnesses in total, including the investigating officers. The trial court, after considering the evidence, acquitted the accused. The State appealed, arguing that the acquittal was erroneous. The High Court heard the learned APP for the State. The court noted that the trial court had considered the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove the ingredients of abetment of suicide. The evidence of the parents did not establish any specific act of instigation or intentional aid by the accused. The High Court found no perversity in the trial court's findings and dismissed the appeal, upholding the acquittal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Abetment of Suicide - Section 306 IPC - Ingredients of abetment - The prosecution must prove that the accused instigated, conspired, or intentionally aided the deceased to commit suicide. Mere allegations of ill-treatment or harassment without evidence of direct or indirect acts of instigation are insufficient to sustain a conviction. In the present case, the deceased committed suicide by drowning, but the evidence of the mother and father of the deceased did not establish any specific act of instigation by the accused. The trial court's acquittal was upheld. (Paras 1-6) B) Criminal Law - Appeal against Acquittal - Scope of interference - The appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the findings are perverse or based on no evidence. The High Court found no perversity in the trial court's reasoning and dismissed the appeal. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the respondents for the offence under Section 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code was justified based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Acquittal of respondents upheld.
Law Points
- Abetment of suicide requires direct or indirect acts of instigation
- conspiracy
- or intentional aid
- mere harassment or cruelty not sufficient
- Section 306 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
