Summary
The Supreme Court retained the husband’s cruelty conviction but acquitted him of abetment of suicide. Specific evidence of assault, ill-treatment and refusal to resume the matrimonial relationship supported cruelty independently of his parents’ acquittal. The record did not establish the proximate, intentional act required for abetment. His cruelty sentence was reduced to the seven months already undergone.
Issues
- Whether the evidence supported cruelty despite acquittal of the husband’s parents.
- Whether marital discord established intentional abetment with a proximate connection to suicide.
Provisions considered
- Section 498A, Indian Penal Code, 1860Specific acts attributable to the husband, supported by the witnesses, sustained his cruelty conviction despite insufficient evidence against his parents. (¶ 7.1–7.4)
- Sections 306 and 107, Indian Penal Code, 1860Abetment required the requisite intentional instigation or aid and a proximate connection with suicide; the evidence did not establish those ingredients here. (¶ 8.1–8.7)
Held
- The husband could not claim acquittal merely by parity with his parents. The evidence established specific assault, ill-treatment and refusal to take the deceased back to the matrimonial home attributable to him. (¶ 7.3–7.4)
- Cruelty or marital discord alone did not establish abetment of suicide. The prosecution had to prove the necessary intentional act of instigation or aid and its proximate connection with the suicide. (¶ 8.1–8.5)
- No such proximate link or positive or direct act was proved against the appellant. His Section 306 conviction therefore could not stand while the Section 498A conviction remained. (¶ 8.6–10)
Result
Appeal partly allowed. Section 306 conviction and sentence set aside; Section 498A conviction affirmed, with imprisonment reduced to the period already undergone. Existing bail bonds discharged.