Summary
A doctor and his mother were convicted under Sections 498A and 306 IPC after his wife, also a doctor, died by suicide nine years into the marriage, and the High Court affirmed. The prosecution rested on the deceased's mother, sister and brother, whose complaint came three weeks after the death. The Supreme Court acquitted both. No complaint of cruelty or dowry demand had been made during the marriage, the families' relations were admittedly cordial, and the brother called it a happy marriage. The psychiatrist the husband consulted the day before the death recorded a history of depressive episodes, an earlier suicide attempt and recent suicidal ideation. The courts below ignored that evidence. There was no proof of any positive act of instigation proximate to the suicide, or of cruelty under Section 498A.
Issues
- Whether the conviction under Section 306 IPC was sustainable without evidence of a positive act of instigation proximate to the suicide
- Whether the belated testimony of the deceased's family alone proved cruelty under Section 498A IPC
- Whether the courts below erred in ignoring the treating psychiatrist's evidence
Provisions considered
- Section 306 read with Section 107, Indian Penal Code, 1860Abetment needs clear mens rea and an active or direct act of instigation or aid, proximate to the suicide, leaving the deceased no other option; mere allegations of harassment do not suffice. (¶¶ 24, 25, 26, 34, 36, 38)
- Section 498A, Indian Penal Code, 1860Apart from family members' statements made after the death, there was no evidence of any dowry demand or ill-treatment during the marriage. (¶¶ 37, 43)
Held
- A Section 306 conviction requires cogent proof of a positive act by the accused, more or less proximate to the time of the suicide, that led or compelled the deceased to take her life, together with an intention to push her into that position. (¶¶ 34, 36, 38, 42)
- The allegations of continuous harassment by the deceased's mother, sister and brother, first made three weeks after the death, were unreliable. No complaint had been made in nine years of marriage, relations between the families were cordial, and the brother himself described the marriage as happy. (¶¶ 35, 37, 40, 43)
- The psychiatrist's record of the consultation a day before the death showed recurrent depressive illness, a past suicide attempt and recent suicidal ideas. The husband's act in taking his wife for that consultation could not be an act of abetment, and the courts below wrongly ignored this evidence. (¶¶ 29, 35, 41, 43)
- There was no evidence of cruelty under Section 498A, and both convictions rested solely on the oral testimony of interested family witnesses. (¶¶ 37, 43, 44)
Result
Appeal allowed; the judgments of the High Court and the trial court were set aside and both appellants acquitted under Sections 498A and 306 IPC.