Summary
A mother-in-law convicted by the Trial Court under ss.304B and 498A IPC and ss.3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was acquitted of those charges by the High Court but convicted under s.306 IPC for abetting her daughter-in-law's suicide by poison and sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment. The Court affirmed: the deceased's 17-year-old brother, who was staying in the house, gave a natural and candid account of the appellant abusing the deceased twice on the day of her death against a background of persistent dowry-related torture, the prosecution's restraint in accusing the appellant alone lent it credibility, the ingredients of s.306 were proved, and the sentence appropriately reflected the appellant's age.
Issues
- Whether the appellant's conviction under s.306 IPC for abetment of her daughter-in-law's suicide was sustainable on the evidence of the deceased's brother (PW-3) and parents (PW-1 and PW-2).
- Whether the sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment warranted interference.
Provisions considered
- Section 306, Indian Penal Code, 1860Abetment of suicide requires an active act or omission that led the deceased to commit suicide, intended to push the deceased into doing so. The appellant's repeated dowry-related torture, which had driven the deceased to seek refuge at her parents' home, followed by the abuse hurled at her on the day of the incident, which acted as the final straw, established the offence beyond reasonable doubt. (¶ 11)
Held
- PW-3, the deceased's brother aged about 17, who accompanied her back to the matrimonial home on 01.05.1998 and was present on 04.05.1998 when the appellant abused her over the cooking and threw away the food, abused her again in the evening, sent him out on an errand and was found on his return shouting that the deceased had consumed something, narrated the events naturally and without exaggeration, candidly admitting he did not witness the poisoning and attributing nothing more to the appellant; that honesty lends his testimony much credibility. (¶¶ 8, 9)
- The parents (PW-1 and PW-2), from the FIR through the trial, made precise and consistent allegations of dowry-related physical and verbal abuse against the appellant alone, repeating the same specific demand, without roping in the husband or other in-laws by omnibus allegations; this unusually fair conduct of the prosecution left no reason to disbelieve its case. (¶ 10)
- The offence under s.306 IPC requires an active act or omission, intended to push the deceased into suicide, which led her to take her life. The deceased had been tortured over dowry to the point of fleeing to her parents, returned only on their assurance that they would settle the demand, and was abused by the appellant on the day of the incident; that abuse was the straw that broke the camel's back, and guilt under s.306 was proved beyond reasonable doubt. (¶ 11)
- The High Court adequately treated the appellant's age of about 70 as a mitigating factor in imposing three years' rigorous imprisonment, a sentence that balances the interests of justice equitably; no interference was warranted. (¶ 12)
Result
Appeal dismissed; High Court order dated 22.03.2018 upheld. The appellant, on bail since 06.09.2018, to surrender before the Trial Court within four weeks to serve the remaining sentence, failing which the Trial Court is to take coercive measures to secure her surrender.