Himachal Pradesh High Court
Reserved On: 10.09.2024 vs Kuldeep Singh on 17 September, 2024
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Sushil Kukreja
1 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Cr. Appeal No. 175 of 2014
Reserved on: 10.09.2024
Decided on: 17.09.2024
____________________________________________________
State of Himachal Pradesh …..Appellant.
.
Versus
Kuldeep Singh ......Respondent.
_____________________________________________________
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
1
Whether approved for reporting? Yes.
_____________________________________________________
For the appellant: Mr. Y.W. Chauhan, Sr. Additional
Advocate General, with Ms. Sharmila
Patial, Mr. Navlesh Verma, Additional
Advocates General, and Mr. Raj Negi,
Deputy Advocate General.
For the respondent: Mr. N.K. Thakur, Sr. Advocate, with
Mr. Divya Raj Singh, Advocate.
Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
The instant appeal has been preferred by the
appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure against the judgment, dated 10.12.2013, passed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Una, District Una, H.P., in
Sessions Trial No. 1-VII/13, whereby the accused (respondent
herein) was acquitted for the offences punishable under Section
498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”).
2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, as per the
1
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
2 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
prosecution story, can be summarized as under:
2(a). On 11.05.2012, the police visited CHC Amb for
inquiring a report and Medical Officer, CHC Amb, opined that
patient Nisha was unfit for making any statement. The Medical
.
Officer referred the patient to RH, Una. Dr. Usha Daroch issued
the MLC of the patient and she handed over the blood sample and
gastric lavage of the patient alongwith the MLC to the police.
Subsequently, the police received information from RH, Una, that
the patient had died. A police team rushed to RH, Una, where the
corpse of the deceased was found. Police got conducted the
postmortem examination of the deceased from Dr. S.K. Bansal,
who issued postmortem report and handed over viscera to the
police. He reserved his opinion till chemical analysis report and as
per the chemical analysis report, there was evidence of Pyrethriod
poisoning.
2(b). The mother of the deceased got her statement
recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C. in the hospital. The corpse of
the deceased was handed over to her parents and the I.O. visited
the place of occurrence where the deceased had consumed poison
and prepared the spot map. The father of the deceased produced
a suicide note, which was taken into possession. Police also took
into possession a plastic vial, which was lying below the bed of the
deceased. Statements of the witnesses were recorded and the
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
3 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
I.O. procured the call details of mobile No. 94186-92770 and
94355-0953. I.O. obtained the final opinion of the doctor at RH,
Una. Marriage certificate of the deceased was also procured from
the Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchayat Tiai. The suicide
.
note of the deceased was sent to GQED, Dharmshala, and its
report was received. As per the police investigation, the deceased
committed suicide due to ill-treatment and torture of the accused.
After completion of the investigation, police presented the charge-
sheet before the learned Trial Court.
3. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined
eighteen witnesses. Statement of the accused under Section 313
Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein he claimed innocence and denied
the prosecution case, however, in defence he did not lead any
evidence.
4. The learned Trial Court, vide impugned judgment dated
10.12.2013 acquitted the accused for the commission of the
offences punishable under Section 498-A and 306 IPC, hence the
instant appeal preferred by the appellant/State.
5. The learned Senior Additional Advocate General for the
appellant/State contended that the impugned judgment is against
the law and facts, based upon mis-appreciation of evidence, which
ultimately resulted into miscarriage of justice, as such the same is
liable to set-aside. He has further contended that the learned Trial
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
4 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
Court has appreciated the evidence in a slip-shod and perfunctory
manner and the impugned judgment is based on hypothetical
reasoning, surmises and conjectures. Lastly, he submitted that the
impugned judgment passed by the learned Trial Court be quashed
.
and set-aside by allowing the instant appeal and the accused be
convicted.
6. Conversely, the learned Senior Counsel for the
respondent/Accused contended that the impugned judgment
passed by the learned Trial Court is the result of proper
appreciation of the material on record and the same was passed
after appreciating the evidence and law in its right and true
perspective. He has further contended that there was nothing
against the accused and the judgment of acquittal passed by the
learned Trial Court is a well reasoned judgment, which does not
require any interference, thus the instant appeal, which sans
merits, be dismissed.
7. We have heard the learned Senior Additional Advocate
General for the appellant/State, learned Senior Advocate for the
respondent/accused, and carefully examined the entire records.
8. It is well settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in a catena
of decisions that an Appellate Court has full power to review, re-
appreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of
acquittal is founded. However, Appellate Court must bear in mind
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
5 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
that in case of acquittal there is double presumption in favour of the
accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him
under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that
every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved
.
guilty by a competent Court of law. Secondly, the accused having
secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further
reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court. Further,
if two reasonable views are possible on the basis of the evidence
on record, the Appellate Court should not disturb the finding of
acquittal recorded by the trial Court.
9. The scope of power of Appellate Court in case of
appeal against acquittal has been dealt with by the Hon’ble Apex
Court in Muralidhar alias Gidda & another Vs. State of Karnatka
reported in (2014) 5 SCC 730, which reads as under:
“10. Lord Russell in Sheo Swarup[1], highlighted the
approach of the High Court as an appellate court
hearing the appeal against acquittal. Lord Russell
said,
“… the High Court should and will always give proper
weight and consideration to such matters as (1) the
views of the trial Judge as to the credibility of the
witnesses; (2) the presumption of innocence in favour
of the accused, a presumption certainly not weakened
by the fact that he has been acquitted at his trial; (3)
the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt;
and (4) the slowness of an appellate court in
disturbing a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who
had the advantage of seeing the witnesses.” The
opinion of the Lord Russell has been followed over the
years.
11. As early as in 1952, this Court in Surajpal Singh[2]
while dealing with the powers of the High Court in an
appeal against acquittal under Section 417 of the
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
6 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
Criminal Procedure Code observed:
“7………..the High Court has full power to review the
evidence upon which the order of acquittal was
founded, but it is equally well settled that the
presumption of innocence of the accused is
further reinforced by his acquittal by the trial court,
and the findings of the trial court which had the
.
advantage of seeing the witnesses and hearing
their evidence can be reversed only for very
substantial and compelling reasons.”
12. The approach of the appellate court in the appeal
against acquittal has been dealt with by this Court in
Tulsiram Kanu [3], Madan Mohan Singh [4], Atley [5] , Aher
Raja Khima [6], Balbir Singh [7], M.G. Agarwal [8], Noor
Khan [9], Khedu Mohton [10], Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade
[11], Lekha Yadav [12], Khem Karan [13], Bishan Singh
[14], Umedbhai Jadavbhai [15], K. Gopal Reddy [16], Tota
Singh [17], Ram Kumar [18], Madan Lal [19], Sambasivan
[20], Bhagwan Singh [21], Harijana Thirupala [22], C.
Antony [23], K. Gopalakrishna [24], Sanjay Thakran [25]
and Chandrappa [26]. It is not necessary to deal with
these cases individually. Suffice it to say that this Court
has consistently held that in dealing with appeals against
acquittal, the appellate court must bear in mind the
following:
(i) There is presumption of innocence in favour of an
accused person and such presumption is
strengthened by the order of acquittal passed inhis favour by the trial court,
(ii) The accused person is entitled to the benefit of
reasonable doubt when it deals with the merit of
the appeal against acquittal,
(iii) Though, the power of the appellate court in
considering the appeals against acquittal are asextensive as its powers in appeals against
convictions but the appellate court is generally
loath in disturbing the finding of fact recorded by
the trial court. It is so because the trial court had
an advantage of seeing the demeanor of the
witnesses. If the trial court takes a reasonable
view of the facts of the case, interference by the
appellate court with the judgment of acquittal is
not justified. Unless, the conclusions reached by
the trial court are palpably wrong or based on
erroneous view of the law or if such conclusions
are allowed to stand, they are likely to result in
grave injustice, the reluctance on the part of the
appellate court in interfering with such::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
7 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )conclusions is fully justified, and
(iv) Merely because the appellate court on re-
appreciation and re-evaluation of the evidence is
inclined to take a different view, interference with
the judgment of acquittal is not justified if the
view taken by the trial court is a possible view.
The evenly balanced views of the evidence must
.
not result in the interference by the appellate
court in the judgment of the trial court.”
10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajesh Prasad vs.
State of Bihar & another, (2022) 3 SCC 471, observed as under:
“31. The circumstances under which an appeal would be
entertained by this Court from an order of acquittalpassed by a High Court may be summarized as
follows:
31.1. Ordinarily, this Court is cautious in
interfering with an order of acquittal, especially
when the order of acquittal has been confirmed upto the High Court. It is only in rarest of rare
cases, where the High Court, on an absolutely
wrong process of reasoning and a legally
erroneous and perverse approach to the facts of
the case, ignoring some of the most vital facts,
has acquitted the accused, that the same may be
reversed by this Court, exercising jurisdictionunder Article 136 of the Constitution. [State of U.P.
v. Sahai (1982) 1 SCC 352] Such fetters on the
right to entertain an appeal are prompted by the
reluctance to expose a person, who has beenacquitted by a competent court of a criminal
charge, to the anxiety and tension of a furtherexamination of the case, even though it is held by
a superior court. [Arunchalam v. P.S.R.
Sadhanantham (1979) 2 SCC 297] An appeal
cannot be entertained against an order of acquittalwhich has, after recording valid and weighty
reasons, has arrived at an unassailable, logical
conclusion which justifies acquittal. [State of
Haryana vs. Lakhbir]31.2. However, this Court has on certain
occasions, set aside the order of acquittal passed
by a High Court. The circumstances under which
this Court may entertain an appeal against an
order of acquittal and pass an order of conviction,
may be summarized as follows:
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
8 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
31.2.1. Where the approach or reasoning of the
High Court is perverse;
(a) Where incontrovertible evidence has been rejected
by the High Court based on suspicion and surmises,
which are rather unrealistic. [State of Rajasthan v.
Sukhpal Singh (1983) 1 SCC 393] For example,
.
where direct, unanimous accounts of the
eyewitnesses, were discounted without cogent
reasoning. [State of U.P. vs. Shanker 1980 Supp
SCC 489]
(b) Where the intrinsic merits of the testimony of
relatives, living in the same house as the victim,
were discounted on the ground that they were
“interested” witnesses. [State of U.P. v. Hakim Singh
(1980)
(c) Where testimony of witnesses had been disbelieved
by the High Court, on an unrealistic conjecture of
personal motive on the part of witnesses to implicate
the accused, when in fact, the witnesses had no axe
to grind in the said matter. [State of Rajasthan v.
Sukhpal Singh (1983) 1 SCC 393]
(d) Where dying declaration of the deceased victim was
rejected by the High Court on an irrelevant ground
that they did not explain the injury found on one of
the persons present at the site of occurrence of the
crime. [Arunachalam vs. P.S.R. Sadhanantham
(1979) 2 SCC 297]
(e) Where the High Court applied an unrealistic standard
of “implicit proof” rather than that of “proof beyond
reasonable doubt” and therefore evaluated the
evidence in a flawed manner. [State of U.P. v. Ranjha
Ram (1986) 4 SCC 99]
(f) Where the High Court rejected circumstantial
evidence, based on an exaggerated and capricious
theory, which were beyond the plea of the accused;
[State of Maharashtra v. Champalal Punjaji Shah
(1981) 3 SCC 610]
(g) Where the High Court acquitted the accused on the
ground that he had no adequate motive to commit
the offence, although, in the said case, there was
strong direct evidence establishing the guilt of the
accused, thereby making it necessary on the part of
the prosecution to establish “motive”. [State of A.P. v.
Bogam Chandraiah (1990) 1 SCC 445]
31.2.2.Where acquittal would result is gross
miscarriage of justice;
(a) Where the findings of the High Court, disconnecting
the accused persons with the crime, were based on
a perfunctory consideration of evidence, [State of
U.P. v. Pheru Singh 1989 Supp (1) SCC] or based on
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
9 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
extenuating circumstances which were purely based
in imagination and fantasy [State of U.P. v. Pussu
(1983) 3 SCC 502]
(b) Where the accused had been acquitted on ground of
delay in conducting trial, which delay was attributable
not to the tardiness or indifference of the prosecuting
agencies, but to the conduct of the accused himself;
.
or where accused had been acquitted on ground of
delay in conducting trial relating to an offence which
is not of a trivial nature. [State of Maharashtra v.
Champalal Punjaji Shah (1981) 3 SCC 610].”
11. In H.D. Sundara & others vs. State of Karnataka,
(2023) 9 SCC 581, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that
the appellate court cannot overturn acquittal only on the ground
that after re-appreciating evidence, it is of the view that the guilt of
the accused was established beyond a reasonable doubt. The
relevant portion of the above judgment is as under:
“8. In this appeal, were are called upon to consider the
legality and validity of the impugned judgment rendered
by the High Court while deciding an appeal againstacquittal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”). The principles
which govern the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while
dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section378 CrPC can be summarized as follows:
8.1.The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the
presumption of innocence;
8.2.The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against
acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral anddocumentary evidence;
8.3.The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against
acquittal, after reappreciating the evidence, is required
to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is
possible view which could have been taken on the
basis of the evidence on record;
8.4.If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court
cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that
another view was also possible; and8.5.The appellate court can interfere with the order of
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
10 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only
conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the
evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused
was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other
conclusion was possible.
9. Normally, when an appellate court exercises appellate
jurisdiction, the duty of the appellate court is to find out.
whether the verdict which is under challenge is correct
or incorrect in law and on facts. The appellate court
normally ascertains whether the decision under
challenge is legal or illegal. But while dealing with an
appeal against acquittal, the appellate court cannot
examine the impugned judgment only to find out
whether the view taken was correct or incorrect. After
re-appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, the
appellate court must first decide whether the trial court’s
view was a possible view. The appellate court cannot
overturn acquittal only on the ground that after re-
appreciating evidence, it is of the view that the guilt of
the accused was established beyond a reasonable
doubt. Only recording such a conclusion an order of
acquittal cannot be reversed unless the appellate court
also concludes that it was the only possible conclusion.
Thus, the appellate court must see whether the view
taken by the trial court while acquitting an accused can
be reasonably taken on the basis of the evidence on
record. If the view taken by the trial court is a possible
view, the appellate court cannot interfere with the order
of acquittal on the ground that another view could have
been taken.”
12. Thus, the law on the issue can be summarized to the
effect that in exceptional cases where there are compelling
circumstances, and the judgment under appeal is found to be
perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the order of
acquittal. Further, if two views were possible on the basis of the
evidence on record, the Appellate Court should not disturb the
finding of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court, merely, because the
Appellate Court could have arrived at a different conclusion than
that of the Trial Court.
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
11 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
13. The burden of proof in a criminal trial never shifts and it
is always the burden of the prosecution to prove its case beyond
reasonable doubt on the basis of acceptable evidence. In fact, it is
a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that the more serious
.
the offence, the stricter the degree of proof required, since a higher
degree of assurance is required to convict the accused.
14. In the instant case, the accused has been tried under
Section 306 read with Section 498-A, IPC for abetment of suicide
and cruelty. Section 306 incorporates the offence of abetment of
suicide and the main ingredients of the offence are the suicidal
death and abetment thereof. The suicide is an intentional killing of
oneself. The relevant provisions, which are now required to be
looked into, are reproduced herein below:-
Section 306 of Indian Penal Code reads as under :
“If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the
commission of such suicide, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine, therebyshowing the commission of suicide must be pursuant to the
abetment committed by any person. It is the case of the
prosecution that the husband abetted the deceased wife to
commit suicide.
15. Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
relates to presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married
woman, which reads as follows:-
“113A. Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married
women.- When the question is whether the commission of
suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or
any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
12 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )committed suicide within a period of seven years from the
date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative
of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the court may
presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the
case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or
by such relative of her husband.
Explanation- For the purposes of this section, “cruelty” shall
.
have the same meaning as in section 498A of the Indian
Panel Code (45 of 1860).”
16. Explanation to Section 498-A IPC defines cruelty
caused on wife by husband or his relatives as follows:-
1[Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband
of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be
punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend tothree years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation.-For the purposes of this section, “cruelty
means”–
(a) any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely
to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave
injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental orphysical) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is
with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to
meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuablesecurity or is on account of failure by her or any person
related to her to meet such demand.]”
17. To substantiate the charges framed against the
respondents/accused and to bring home the guilt of the accused,
the prosecution examined as many as 18 witnesses. However, the
case of the prosecution mainly rests upon the statements of PW-1,
Smt. Neelam Rani, mother of the deceased, PW-2, Shri Jitender
Rana, brother of the deceased, PW-3, Shri Surinder Kumar, father
of the deceased, PW-4, Ms. Reena, PW-7, Shri Ashwani, PW-8,
Dr. S.K. Bansal, PW-16, ASI Kuldeep Kumar (I.O.), PW-17, Dr.
Una Darosh and PW-18, Dr. Minakshi Mahajan.
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
13 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
18. Mother of the deceased, i.e., Smt. Neelam Rani, who
lodged the FIR, appeared in the witness-box as PW-1, deposed
that on 14.11.2011 the deceased got married to the accused and
for 2-2½ months the deceased was kept nicely. Thereafter, the
.
deceased was tortured and maltreated on the ground of dowry and
allegations of unchastity were also leveled. This witness has
further deposed that the deceased used to narrate her that
accused tortured and also misbehaved with her on telephone.
During the first week of March, 2012, when the deceased was
indisposed and used to stay in their house, accused alongwith his
brother forcibly took her. She has deposed that accused started
demanding dowry in the last week of March, 2012, and gas
connection was given. The deceased further narrated her that
accused was demanding gift on the retirement of his father, thus a
dining table, worth Rs.21,000/- was given. On 9th May, 2012,
around 09:30 a.m., the deceased came to their house and told that
accused was not satisfied with the dowry and he threatened her
and also leveled allegations of unchastity on her and the accused
was demanding rupees five lacs on the retirement of his father.
She (PW-1) assured to give rupees one lac. On 11th May, the
accused threatened the deceased over telephone and when she
(PW-1) talked with him, he misbehaved with her too and when she
again talked to him on phone, he apologized. As per this witness,
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
14 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
when she, alongwith with her husband and son, was in the house
of one Vijay, they received a call of Shammi from Delhi, who
inquired about the behavior of the accused with the deceased, and
he informed that the deceased was going to consume poison due
.
to the ill-treatment and torture of the accused. She further stated
that her son went back to Amb and he was informed that the
deceased had been taken to hospital at Amb by Reena and Neeta
Devi, therefore, her son and she also rushed to the hospital. Her
husband was patient of depression, so he was not informed and on
the direction of the doctor, they took the deceased to Una Hospital,
but enroute the deceased died. At Una Hospital, police came and
she reported the matter to the police, vide her statement, Ex. PW-
1/A. She received telephonic call of her husband, who disclosed
about the suicide note and an empty poison vial beneath the bed of
the deceased. She has deposed that her nephew came with a
photocopy of the suicide note, which was handed over to the
police. As per this witness, the deceased had committed suicide
by consuming poison due to the maltreatment and torture of the
accused. This witness, in her cross-examination, admitted that
prior to the marriage, the deceased was studying in BA 2nd year
and after marriage she continued her studies. The deceased used
to attend the college from her in-law’s house and the accused also
appeared in one paper of BA 3rd year in March, 2012 and after
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
15 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
attending the paper he went back to Assam for joining his duty at
Dibrugarh on 03.04.2012. The deceased used to come to their
house while attending college at Amb. She also admitted that on
the day the deceased committed suicide, the accused was in
.
Assam. She did not disclose the fact that she received a call of the
accused at 07:15 a.m. to anyone, including the police, panchayat
and neighbours before leaving for village Jhalera.
19. Brother of the deceased-Jitender Rana (PW-2)
deposed that in the morning of 11.05.2012 the accused telephoned
the deceased and used obscene words and the deceased started
weeping. His mother (PW-1) took the mobile phone from the
deceased and the accused also misbehaved with his mother. He
further deposed that they consoled the deceased and assured her
to get the matter compromised on their return from condolence at
Jhalera. He came on bike and his parents in a bus, when his
maternal nephew Shammi telephonically informed him that the
deceased was going to commit suicide by consuming poison due
to the torture of the accused. As per this witness, he tried to talk to
the deceased, but she did not respond, so he called Reena, who
informed him that fluid was coming from the mouth of the
deceased and she was unwell. In turn, he informed his mother
(PW-1) and Reena and Anita had brought the deceased to the
hospital, wherefrom the deceased was referred to RH, Una, and
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
16 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
enroute she died. He deposed that her sister (deceased)
committed suicide due to the torture and harassment of the
accused. This witness, in his cross-examination, admitted that
accused was doing job in Assam and after exam on 3rd April, he
.
went back to Assam for joining his duty. They did not report the
matter to the police or panchayat qua maltreatment and demand of
dowry and after the death of the deceased dowry articles were
taken back by them. This witness deposed that in his statement to
the police he had narrated about the demand of dowry and that the
accused had demanded rupees five lacs, whereas in his statement
mark D2 it is not so recorded.
20. Father of the deceased-Surinder Kumar, while
appearing in the witness-box as PW-3, reiterated the version as
deposed by PW-1 (mother of the deceased) and he, in his cross-
examination, admitted that the deceased was studying in BA 2nd
year and used to come to Amb from her in-laws’ house and she
used to come to their house. As per this witness, the deceased
was not willing to marry the accused, but again stated that she was
willing for marriage, thus marriage was solemnized.
21. PW-4-Reena, who alongwith one Anita allegedly took
the deceased to the hospital, deposed that on 11.05.2012, around
09:45 a.m., she was informed telephonically by Neelam that the
deceased had consumed poison. She further stated that when she
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
17 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
reached the house of the deceased she found two ladies, i.e.,
Mukti Sharma and Kiran Sharma and she supported them to take
the deceased in a vehicle. This witness was declared hostile by
the learned Public Prosecutor and was subjected to extensive
.
cross-examination. This witness, in her cross-examination, by the
learned Public Prosecutor denied that she received any call of
Shammi from Delhi, who advised her to go to the parental house of
the deceased. She also denied that she accompanied the
deceased to Una hospital. She feigned her ignorance qua the fact
that the deceased had committed suicide due to the ill-treatment
and torture of the accused.
22. PW-7, Ashwani Kumar, deposed that on 11.05.2012,
around 10:00 a.m., he received a telephonic call from his wife,
Anita, who disclosed that the deceased had consumed poison, but
before he arrived, the deceased was taken to Una hospital. This
witness was also declared hostile by the learned Public Prosecutor
and he was subjected to extensive cross-examination. This
witness, in his cross-examination, by the learned Public Prosecutor
denied that his wife informed him that the accused used to torture
the deceased due to his ill-treatment she was in depression.
23. PW-8, Dr. S.K. Bansal, who conducted postmortem
examination on the corpse of the deceased on 11.05.2012, stated
that he noticed no injury on any part of the corpse. There was no
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
18 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
ligature mark on the neck Cranium and spinal cord was normal.
Thorax was also normal. Frothing was present at the mouth
nostrils. Stomach was full of grey fluid. As per the chemical
analysis report, Ex. PW-8/B, there was evidence of Pyrethriod
.
poisoning. He has further stated that viscera was preserved and
sent to RFSL, Dharamshala, and the same was handed over to the
police. He had issued the postmortem report, Ex. PW-8/C, and
opined the cause of death due to poisoning. The time elapsed
between death and postmortem was within 12 hours.
24. PW-17, Dr. Usha Daroch, the then Medical Officer CHC
Amb deposed that on 11.05.2012, around 10:00 a.m., the
deceased was brought with the alleged history of ingestion of some
poisonous substance. She administered first aid to the deceased
and took sample of gastric lavage and blood, which were handed
over to the police for chemical analysis. She noticed no injury on
the person of the deceased and she referred her to RH Una for
further treatment. PW-18 Dr. Minakshi Mahajan, the then Assistant
Director, Documents and Photo Division, RFSL, Dhamshala, stated
that on 14.05.2012 two sealed envelopes, each bearing three seals
having impression ‘K’, were received through constable Jyoti
Prakash. The said samples were thoroughly examined in the
laboratory.
25. I.O., Kuldeep Kumar, who appeared in the witness-box
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
19 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
as PW-16 deposed that on being telephonically informed from
CHC, Amb, rapat, Ex. PW-16/A, was entered and he alongwith
Constable Ajay No. 386 went to CHC Amb. He further stated that
the deceased was not in a position to give statement and she was
.
referred to RH, Una. As per this witness, he moved an application
Ex. PW-16/A to Medical Officer for obtaining opinion qua giving
statement by the deceased, but the doctor declared her unfit to
give statement. He stated that he obtained MLC of the deceased,
which is mark ‘S’. He had taken the blood sample of the deceased
alongwith gastric lavage from doctor Usha Daroch in a sealed
bottle. When he returned to Police Station Amb, he received
telephonic information that the deceased had died, thus rapat, Ex.
PW-10/B was entered. Thereafter, he alongwith Constable Ajay
Kumar and HHG Saroj Kumari went to RH Una. Postmortem
examination of the deceased was got conducted. Statement of the
mother of the deceased, Ex.PW-1/A, was recorded, whereupon
FIR, Ex. PW-13/B, was registered. During investigation, he visited
the spot and prepared the spot map of the house of the Surinder
(father of the deceased). As per this witness, father of the
deceased had produced a suicide note, Ex. PW-1/B, which was
taken into possession. An empty plastic bottle, which was lying
below the bed of the deceased was recovered, which was sealed
in a cloth parcel and sealed with seal having impression ‘K’. He
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
20 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
recorded the statements of the witnesses and on receipt of RFSL
report, he obtained final opinion of doctor at RH Una.
26. We have closely scrutinized the statements of Smt.
Neelam Rani, mother of the deceased (PW-1), Shri Jitender Rana,
.
brother of the deceased (PW-2) and Shri Surinder Kumar, father of
the deceased (PW-3) and from the perusal of their statements, it
has not been established that the accused was maltreating or
harassing the deceased on account of bringing insufficient dowry
or to meet his unlawful demands of dowry. The aforesaid
witnesses have made lot of improvements in their statements.
Though, in their statements they have stated that the accused
used to torture the deceased, however, they have admitted that no
complaint, whatsoever, to this effect was submitted by the
deceased or by them prior to the death of the deceased with the
police, panchayat or with any other authority. From the perusal of
the statements, it is clear that in the month of March, 2012, the
deceased had appeared in the examination of BA 3rd year and the
accused had also appeared in the compartment paper of BA 2nd
year and after the examination, the accused went to Assam in the
month of April, 2012, for joining his duty.
27. From the perusal of the entire evidence on record, it
has become clear that the deceased had continued her studies
even after her marriage and she used to come to attend her
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
21 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
college at Amb everyday from the house of her in-laws. It is an
admitted case of the prosecution that the deceased had died in the
house of her parents. It has also come on record that the accused
was not present at the time of the death of the deceased at
.
Amb/Una and at that relevant time he was in Assam. The
prosecution has failed to explain as to in what manner the accused
had tortured the deceased on the mobile phone on the day she
committed suicide. No record of conversation has been produced
by the prosecution, which has allegedly taken place between the
deceased and the accused on that day. There is no evidence on
record to suggest that the alleged cruelty meted out to the victim
had in fact induced her to end her life by committing suicide.
28. Perusal of the suicide note shows that some general
statement has been made by the deceased against her husband.
It has nowhere been mentioned in the suicide note that the
accused had ever instigated the deceased to commit suicide. In
fact, no specific instance of abetment to commit suicide by the
accused has been mentioned therein. The prosecution has also
failed to explain as to why in the suicide note it has been
mentioned that “My Mummy-Papa are not at fault”. Moreover, the
suicide note is undated, hence, in the absence of any evidence as
to when suicide note, Ex.PW-1/B, was written, much importance
cannot be attached to it, in order to arrive to a conclusion that the
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
22 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
accused had abetted the deceased to commit suicide. The
prosecution has failed to lead any evidence to suggest that the
accused had instigated or compelled the deceased to commit
suicide as such merely on the basis of the suicide note, the
.
accused cannot be convicted for the death of the deceased.
29. The mere fact that woman had committed suicide
within six months of her marriage and that she had been subjected
to cruelty by her husband, does not automatically give rise to the
presumption that the suicide had been abetted by her husband.
There is no direct evidence that accused aided or instigated the
deceased to commit suicide or entered into any conspiracy to aid
her in committing suicide.
30. In Ghulam Mustafa vs State of Uttarakhand, AIR
2015 SC 3101, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a casual
remark or something said in a routine way or in usual conversation
should not be construed or misunderstood to mean ‘abetment.’ A
conviction on mere allegation of harassment without any positive
action in proximity to the time of occurrence on the part of accused
that led a person to commit suicide is not sustainable under section
306 IPC.
31. Again, in Gurucharan vs State of Punjab, AIR 2017 SC
74, it has been held that to constitute the offence under section
306 IPC, there should be a live link between abetment and suicide
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
23 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
and the intention and involvement of the accused to aid or instigate
the commission of suicide is imperative. So far as the grievance of
dowry demand and consequential harassment is concerned, it
should not be general in nature and there should be some specific
.
incident and should have provocative capability to drive the
deceased to such distressed state, mental and physical that she
could elect to end her life.
32. In Nachhatter Singh vs State of Punjab, (2011) 11
SCC 542, the Court observed that in case of abetment of suicide
by married woman, the cruelty and harassment meted out must be
of nature to drive a person of common prudence to commit suicide.
Every quarrel between husband and wife which results in suicide
cannot be taken to abetment by husband. For abetment, standard
of reasonable or practical woman as compared to headstrong and
over sensitive one is to be applied.
33. In Sohan Raj Sharma Vs. State of Haryana, AIR 2008
Supreme Court 2108, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held:-
“9. In State of West Bengal Vs. Orilal Jaiswal (AIR 1994
SC 1418) this Court has observed that the courts
should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and
circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced
in the trial for the purpose of finding whether the cruelty
meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end
her life by committing suicide. If it transpires to the
Court that a victim committing suicide was
hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and
differences in domestic life quite common to the
society to which the victim belonged and such
petulance discord and differences were not expected
to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
24 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the
Court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that
the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide
should be found guilty.
10. Section 107 IPC defines abetment of a thing. The
offence of abetment is a separate and distinct offence
provided in the Act as an offence. A person abets the.
doing of a thing when (1) he instigates any person to
do that thing; or (2) engages with one or more other
persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing; or
(3) intentionally aids, by act or illegal omission, the
doing of that thing. These things are essential tocomplete abetment as a crime. The word “instigate”
literally means to provide, incite, urge on or bring about
by persuasion to do any thing. The abetment may be
by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid, as
provided in the three clauses of Section 107. Section
109 provides that if the act abetted is committed in
consequence of abetment and there is no provision for
the punishment of such abetment, then the offender is
to be punished with the punishment provided for the
original offence. ‘Abetted’ in Section 109 means the
specific offence abetted. Therefore, the offence for the
abetment of which a person is charged with the
abetment is normally linked with the proved offence.
11. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide there must be
proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the
commission of suicide. The mere fact that the husband
treated the deceased-wife with cruelty is not enough.
[See Mahinder Singh Vs. State of M.P. (1955 AIR SCW
4570)].”
34. In Harjit Singh Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 2006
Supreme Court 680, it is held as under:-
“26. Before invoking the provisions of Section 306 IPC,
it is necessary to establish that : (1) the deceasedcommitted suicide, and (ii) she had been subjected
to cruelty within the meaning of Section 498 A IPC.
27. Only in the event those facts are established, a
presumption in terms of Section 113 A of the Indian
Evidence Act could be raised. In the instant case,
the prosecution has not been able to prove that the
deceased was subjected to cruelty within the
meaning of Section 498 A, IPC. No case that the
deceased committed suicide was also made out.”
35. The legal position has been reiterated by the Hon’ble
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
25 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
Supreme Court in Mariano Anto Bruno and another Vs.
Inspector of Police, AIR 2022 Supreme Court 4994, wherein it
has been held as follows:-
” 25. The ingredients of Section 306 IPC have been
.
extensively laid out in M. Arjunan Vs. State, represented by
its Inspector of Police 7 which are as under:-
“The essential ingredients of the offence under
Section 306 IPC are: (i) the abetment; (ii) the intention
of the accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceasedto commit suicide. The act of the accused, however,
insulting the deceased by using abusive language will
not, by itself, constitute the abetment of suicide. There
should be evidence capable of suggesting that the
accused intended by such act to instigate thedeceased to commit suicide. Unless the ingredients of
instigation/abetment to commit suicide are satisfied,
accused cannot be convicted under Section 306 IPC.”
26. In order to convict an accused under Section 306 IPC,
the state of mind to commit a particular crime must be
visible with regard to determining the culpability. With regard
to the same, a two-judge bench of this Court in Ude Singh &
Ors. State of Haryana observed as under:-
“16. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there
must be a proof of direct or indirect act/s of incitement
to the commission of suicide. It could hardly be
disputed that the question of cause of a suicide,particularly in the context of an offence of abetment of
suicide, remains a vexed one, involving multifaceted
and complex attributes of human behavior and
responses/reactions. In the case of accusation forabetment of suicide, the Court would be looking for
cogent and convincing proof of the act/s of incitement
to the commission of suicide. In the case of suicide,mere allegation of harassment of the deceased by
another person would not suffice unless there be such
action on the part of the accused which compels the
person to commit suicide; and such an offendingaction ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence.
Whether a person has abetted in the commission of
suicide by another or not, could only be gathered from
the facts and circumstances of each case.
16.1. For the purpose of finding out if a person has
abetted commission of suicide by another; the
consideration would be if the accused is guilty of the
act of instigation of the act of suicide. As explained
and reiterated by this Court in the decisions above-
referred, instigation means to goad, urge forward,
provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. If the
persons who committed suicide had been::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
26 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )hypersensitive and the action of accused is otherwise
not ordinarily expected to induce a similarly
circumstanced person to commit suicide, it may not be
safe to hold the accused guilty of abetment of suicide.
But, on the other hand, if the accused by his acts and
by his continuous course of conduct creates a
situation which leads the deceased perceiving no
other option except to commit suicide, the case may.
fall within the four-corners of Section 306 IPC. If the
accused plays an active role in tarnishing the self-
esteem and self-respect of the victim, which eventually
draws the victim to commit suicide, the accused may
be held guilty of abetment of suicide. The question ofmens rea on the part of the accused in such cases
would be examined with reference to the actual acts
and deeds of the accused and if the acts and deeds
are only of such nature where the accused intended
nothing more than harassment or snap show of anger,
a particular case may fall short of the offence ofabetment of suicide. However, if the accused kept on
irritating or annoying the deceased by words or deeds
until the deceased reacted or was provoked, a
particular case may be that of abetment of suicide.
Such being the matter of delicate analysis of humanbehaviour, each case is required to be examined on its
own facts, while taking note of all the surroundingfactors having bearing on the actions and psyche of
the accused and the deceased.”
36. In Hans Raj Vs. State of Haryana, (2004) 12 SCC
257, the Supreme Court held that the nature of presumption under
Section 113A is discretionary in the sense that from the mere fact
that the wife committed suicide within 07 years of marriage and
that she had been subjected to cruelty by the husband, there will
be no automatic presumption that the suicide had been abetted by
the husband.
37. Thus, in view of the aforesaid authoritative
pronouncements of Hon’ble Supreme Court, if the Court examines
the allegations made in this case, there is no direct evidence of
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
27 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
cruelty inflicted by the present accused against the deceased. The
facts suggest that there may have some strained relationship
between the accused and the deceased that does not mean that
he inflicted physical and mental torture upon the victim which led
.
her to commit suicide. There is no principle of law that wherever
wife commits suicide, the husband would bear the responsibility
and would be held liable. It has come in evidence on record that
the deceased Nisha appeared in the examination of BA 3 rd year in
March, 2012, and accused had also appeared in the compartment
examination of BA 2nd year and after the examination was over, the
accused went to Assam in the month of April, 2012 for joining his
duty. It is an admitted that that the deceased had died while she
was in her parents’ house and at that time the accused was in
Assam in connection with his duties. When the deceased was
living at her parents’ house and the deceased was quite far away,
i.e., in Dibrugarh in Assam and no specific incident of maltreatment
and cruelty was disclosed or reported either to the police or to the
local panchayat or to any other authority before her death by the
deceased or her parents/relatives, the general allegations of
harassment cannot be sufficient to hold the accused guilty for the
offence of abetment of suicide. The prosecution has failed to
establish positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or to
compel the deceased to commit suicide. The allegations made by
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
28 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
the prosecution witnesses are general in nature and no specific
instance of the alleged maltreatment or cruelty has been given by
the prosecution witnesses, which can be construed as cruelty or
abetment to commit suicide on the part of the accused.
.
38. The prosecution has failed to examine any independent
witness to prove that any demand of dowry was made by the
accused in their presence. There is no satisfactory material on
record to prove cruelty and harassment with the deceased before
the incident or abetment in proximity of time for committing suicide.
To attract the offence under Section 306 IPC, the alleged cruelty,
instigation or encouragement by accused should not only be
proved by prosecution but also be of such nature which leaves no
option to the deceased except to commit suicide. There is no
evidence led by prosecution that there was abetment of such grave
nature which was likely to drive the deceased to commit suicide.
The suicidal death in this case cannot be due to any illegal act or
illegal omission or instigation, by anybody else. It may be the
deceased’s own act, being of hyper sensitive nature, for which, the
husband cannot be held guilty. The learned Trial Court has rightly
observed that the decision to commit suicide invariably is taken on
the spur of the moment and normally it does not require long drawn
elaborate planning even though the person is disturbed over a
point for some time.
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS
29 Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8635 )
39. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that the view
taken by the trial Court while acquitting the accused is a
reasonable view based on the evidence on the record and the
same cannot be said to be perverse or contrary to the material on
.
record.
40. In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, no
interference in the judgment of acquittal dated 10.12.2013, passed
by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Una, District Una, H.P.
in Sessions Trial No. 1-VII/13, is required as the same is the result
of proper appreciation of evidence and law. The appeal, which is
devoid of merits, deserves dismissal and is accordingly dismissed.
Bail bonds are discharged.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed
of.
( Tarlok Singh Chauhan )
Judge
( Sushil Kukreja )
Judge
17th September, 2024
(virender)
::: Downloaded on – 17/09/2024 20:32:41 :::CIS