Summary
The Supreme Court discharged a husband and his parents of abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC because the only specific harassment alleged, the sale of the wife's streedhan and ill-treatment when she sought its return, occurred about a year before her death and showed no proximate link or intention to instigate suicide; but it upheld the charge of cruelty under Section 498A IPC, which the material prima facie supported.
Issues
- Whether a prima facie case under Section 498A IPC was made out against the appellants.
- Whether a prima facie case under Section 306 IPC was made out against the appellants.
- Whether the appellants were entitled to discharge under Section 227 CrPC for either offence.
Provisions considered
- Section 227, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973The appellants' discharge application was examined on a preliminary analysis of the FIR, chargesheet and witness statements; discharge was granted for Section 306 IPC, where the ingredients were absent even prima facie, and refused for Section 498A IPC. (¶¶ 4, 7, 14, 27, 28)
- Section 498A, Indian Penal Code, 1860Relying on the statutory meaning of cruelty, the Court found that specific allegations by the informant and relatives of physical and mental harassment over the years, including selling her streedhan ornaments and ill-treatment when she demanded them back, prima facie made out the offence. (¶¶ 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
- Section 306 read with Section 107, Indian Penal Code, 1860Abetment of suicide requires instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid with clear mens rea and a positive act proximate to the suicide; harassment a year before the death, without any intention to drive her to suicide, did not meet that test. (¶¶ 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27)
Held
- Cruelty simpliciter does not constitute the offence under Section 498A IPC; the conduct must be wilful conduct likely to drive the woman to suicide or cause grave injury, or harassment to coerce her or her relatives to meet an unlawful demand for property, and each case turns on its facts. (¶¶ 8, 10, 11)
- That the deceased made no complaint during twelve years of marriage does not mean there was no cruelty; specific instances spoken to by the informant, relatives and the chargesheet, including the sale of her streedhan and harassment when she sought its return, prima facie made out Section 498A, so the appellants must be tried for it. (¶¶ 12, 13, 14, 15)
- A charge under Section 306 IPC requires abetment within Section 107 and a clear, discernible intention to instigate or aid the suicide; mens rea cannot be presumed, and harassment alone is not enough without a deliberate act of incitement or facilitation. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19, 20)
- In a wife's suicide, the court must examine whether the cruelty or harassment left her no option but to end her life; there must be proof of a positive act by the accused proximate in time to the suicide, and conduct intended only to harass or vent anger may fall short of abetment. (¶¶ 21, 22, 23, 24, 25)
- Since the alleged sale of ornaments and the ensuing harassment occurred about a year before the death, and even if true showed no intention to instigate suicide, there was no proximate link and no mens rea; the ingredients of Section 306 were not made out even prima facie and the appellants were discharged of that offence. (¶¶ 26, 27)
Result
Appeal partly allowed; appellants discharged of the charge under Section 306 IPC; charge under Section 498A IPC upheld and trial to proceed on it.