STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Seema Devi, daughter of Sohan Lal Sharma and Smt. Prabhawati Devi was married with
accused-appellant on 23.6.1985.
2. According to Sohan Lal marriage of Seema with the accused-appellant was performed in a
cordial manner. Dowry, as the parents wished, was given to Seema.
3. On 17.6.1986, within one year of marriage, Seema died of suicide. On 16.6.1986, she poured
kerosene on herself and set herself to fire. Before committing suicide she wrote a suicide note
and a letter to her husband in a diary.
4. Her dying-declaration was recorded on 16.6.1986 by Parmeshwar Dayal, Tehsildar and
Executive Magistrate.
5. Sohan Lal Sharma is a resident of Raipur, Madhya Pradesh. The accused-appellant was
residing in Shantinagar locality of Raipur. Seema's elder sister Shalini married with Dr.
Ramadhar Sharma is also residing in Raipur. Thus, the three families, i.e., the family of father of
Seema, the family of her elder sister Shalini and the family of the accused-appellant are all
residents of Raipur though residing in different localities at reasonable distances from each other.
Nevertheless the three families were on visiting terms as admitted by almost all the witnesses.
6. The finding of guilt as recorded by the Trial Court and the High Court rests on the testimony
of five witnesses, namely, Atul Kumar, brother of the deceased, Shalini and Dr. Ramadhar
Sharma, respectively the sister and sister's husband of the deceased, Sohan Lal Sharma and
Prabhawati Devi, parents of the deceased..
7. Conviction of Ramesh Kumar, the accused-appellant, on charges under Sections 306 and 498A IPC. He was sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 306 IPC and to
two years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 498-A IPC, both the sentences having been
directed to run concurrently. The conviction along with sentences has been maintained by the
High Court.

8. This appeal by special leave is directed against conviction of Ramesh Kumar, the accusedappellant, on charges under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC.

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

Whether conviction of the Appellant accused under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code
tenable?

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

CONTENTION 1 : The Appellant is rightly convicted under Section 306 of the Indian
Penal Code and the conviction of the accused is tenable.
In order to meet a social demand to resolve difficulty of proof where helpless married women
were eliminated by being forced to commit suicide by the husband or in-laws certain provisions
have been introduced in the Criminal legislations. In certain situations going by the
circumstances law has rightly given the courts sufficient authority to presume the occurence of
an offence.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
CONTENTION 1 : The Appellant is rightly convicted under Section 306 of the Indian
Penal Code and the conviction of the accused is tenable.
In order to meet a social demand to resolve difficulty of proof where helpless married women
were eliminated by being forced to commit suicide by the husband or in-laws certain provisions
have been introduced in the Criminal legislations. In certain situations going by the
circumstances law has rightly given the courts sufficient authority to presume the occurence of
an offence.
1.1

As per Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, Presumption of suicide is likely to
be raised in the given circumstances.
Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, authorises courts to presume the
Abetment of suicide if the below mentioned three conditions get fulfilled :1
1. The suicide must have been commited by the woman.
2. The suicide must have been commited within 7 years of her marriage.
3. The husband or the relatives who have been charged must have subjected her to
cruelty.
As per the case in hand, the first two conditions for the application of this section can
easily be seen to have been fulfilled as the Appellants wife seems to have commited
suicide by pouring kerosene on her and setting fire to herself, hereby fulfiling the first
condition. Moreover, the death being caused within one year of their marriage clearly
establishes the fulfilment of the second condition.

1 Hans Raj vs State Of Haryana (2004)12 SCC 257

4

As per the statement given by the father of the deceased, dowry as demanded was given
to the in laws of the deceased. However, it is established in the facts that after marriage
when he went to see his daughter, she frequently used to complain him regarding the
quality of the furnitures being inferior in quality which she had to hear from

her

complaining in laws on a regular basis. According to Seemas (deceased) brother, he was

told by his parents that the accused was teasing Seema. He visited Seema and her in-laws
about 15 to 20 times but Seema never told him anything. However, according to Atul
Kumar, 'her face was tense and terrorized and she had asked me to go back'.
These instances point towards the happening of the the third condition i.e. cruelty and
harrassment regarding dowry certainly has taken place and thus the third condition for the
applicability of section 113A of the Evidence Act gets fulfiled here.2

1.2

The words of the accused to his wife were sufficient to constitute the offence of
Abetment.
As per Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, abetment of suicide has been defined as :
Abetment of suicide - 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.
To constitute this offence under section 306, Abetment should hae the same meaning as
defined under S.107 of the Code which includes instigating, engaging or intentionally
aiding someone to commit a crime punishable in the eyes of Law. A person who does not
himself commit a crime, may however command, urge, procure, counsel, encourage,
induce,3 request or help a third person to bring it about and thereby be guilty of the
offence of abetment.
Istigation may be in any form. Law does not require instigation to be in particular form or
that it should be in words. Whether there was instigation, is a question of fact.4

2 Hira Lal And Ors vs State (Govt. Of Nct) Delhi AIR 2003 SC 2865
3 Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994) CrLJ 3139 (SC)
4 Brij Lal v. Prem Chand AIR 1989 SC 1661
5

In the case in hand in the last quarrel the accused had with the deceased, his words were
you are free to do whatever you wish and go wherever you like. Such words can be
deemed to constitute abetment depending upon the facts and circumstances of a situation.
In this case, the deceased being a pious Hindu wife having being given in marriage by
her parents to her husband certainly had no other place to go excepting the house of her
husband and if the husband had "freed" her , being subject to gross cruelty by her
husband, she was absolutely justified in thinking that the only thing which she could do
was to kill herself, die peacefully and thus free herself according to her husband's wish.
Thus, her husband as per his words had made her free to commit suicide which
constitutes Abetment of Suicide under Section 306 of the IPC.
Moreover, a plethora of cases exist in this regard where it has been held that the conduct
of the husband and his relatives in creating such a miserable situation to evolve in which
the deceased has no other recourse than to commit suicide, in fact, amounts to abetment
by instigation.5
In a landmark judgement it was held that the word instigate should not be given
restricted meaning to actual words spoken but ought to be given a wider meaning to
commensurate with the ordinary experiences of life.6
1.3

Facts establish Cruelty by the accused towards his wife and he shall be held liable
under S.498A.
The letter written to Sohanlal 3 to 4 months before her death clearly shows that Seema
was being subjected to cruelty in her husbands house. In the letter addressed to her father
Seema specifically stresses on the point where she keeps on requesting her father to keep
the letter a secret and not to reveal about the letter to anyone. This is the clear indication
of the fear and terror of her in laws she had in her mind. Moreover, the letters contents
talking about the replacement of the Sofa and returning of the ornaments which were
given to her as dowry in her marriage clearly establish that seema was being subjected to
continuous harassment by her in laws in matters of the quality of the items given to her as
dowry.

5 Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana AIR 1998 SC 958

6 Ram Kumar v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1998) CrLJ 952 (MP)
6

The same letter Seema also conveys to her father the Harassment caused to her by ramesh
by including in it words like maar pit which means beating her for around two
continuous hours in the night and again in the morning which clearly constitutes phisical
cruelty7 to attract S.498A Of IPC. The testimony by handwriting expert makes it clear
that the sole author of the letter was Seema and the same is not a fabricated one.
Thus, Cruelty as defined under Section 498A occured to Seema can clearly be
established through the letters contents. Hereby, fulfilling all the conditions for the
application of S.498A Which specifically deals with cruelty or harassment caused with a
view of meeting dowry demand to a married woman which is likely to drive her to
commit suicide.8

7 Satpal v. State of Haryana (1998) 5 SCC 687

8 Giridhar Shanlar Tawade v. State of Maharashtra (2002) 5 SCC 177
7

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

In the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, the counsels for
the Respondent humbly and forever pray before this Honble Court to kindly:

UPHOLD THE JUDGMENT GIVEN BY THE TRIAL COURT AND THE HIGH COURT

AND/ OR

PASS ANY OTHER ORDER THAT IT DEEMS FIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE,
EQUITY AND GOOD CONSCIENCE.

And for this the Respondent as in duty bound shall forever humbly pray.

(Counsels on behalf of the Respondent)