Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
They had also alleged that she had been provoked by the in-laws conduct and behaviour and thus committed suicide. It was also accused that the father-in- law, mother-in-law and the husband of the deceased have been the abettors of the crime and the deceased died of second to third degree burns. The mother-in-law of the deceased and the mother of the accused Satpal Singh, stated in her statement that she was lying in her house at that time and the de- ceased was cooking food on a kerosene stove, and as such the deceased caught fire accidentally. Gurbachan Singh filed an appeal against them in the Trial Court and in 1984; the additional sessions judge convicted Satpal Singh and his parents of abetment of suicide and sentenced them to five years imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2,000 each. Relying on the oral evidence presented. The convicted persons then appealed to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
The High Court was of the view that the guilt of the accused had not been proved because there was absence of evidence and therefore had acquitted them. The complainant and father of the deceased aggrieved by the order of the High Court preferred these appeals by way of special leave to appeal.
PRINCIPLE
The appellants had charged the respondents under S. 306 of the Indian Penal Code which is about the abatement of suicide which states: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. In the present case the definition of abetment was significantly expanded in accordance with the circumstances of a married womans life. The court also relied on section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, which lays down that when a married woman commits suicide within a period of seven years of marriage, and it is shown that her husband and his relatives had subjected her to cruelty, the court may presume, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, that her suicide had been abetted by those who treated her with cruelty. Although this section was introduced into the Act in 1983, a few months after Ravinder died, the court held that as it is a general rule relating to evidence, it is retrospective in effect. In the present case, the Supreme Court by quoted that persistent ill-treatment of a woman for dowry amounted to abetment to suicide. and Torture is Abetment of Suicide.
having regard to all the circumstances of the case, that her suicide had been abetted by those who treated her with cruelty. Although this section was introduced into the Act in 1983, a few months after Ravinder died, the court held that as it is a general rule relating to evidence, it is retrospective in effect. The honble judges referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Brij Lal v. Prem Chand & Anr2 held that instigation and abetment must be adjudged in the context of the entire evidence. In the above case, there was written evidence from the side of the deceased party. However, In the present case, the court relied solely on oral evidence which, in most cases of matrimonial cruelty and violence, is the primary evidence and held that in the instant case on a proper consideration and weighing of the evidences the only reasonable view that can be taken is that the cruel behaviour and constant taunts and harassment caused by the accused persons while Ravinder Kaur, deceased was in her in-laws house instigated her to commit suicide and in our considered opinion no other reasonable view follows from a proper consideration and appraisement of the evidences on record.
The bench at last decided to set aside the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court and uphelded the conviction of the accused of the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. and sentence imposed upon them by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar and finally decided that the respondents will immediately surrender in the Court of Sessions Judge, Amritsar to serve out the remaining period of their sentence.
JT 1989 3 SC 1