1989 (9) TMI 385 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Proof of Suicide
2. Abetment of Suicide u/s 306 IPC
3. Evidence and Conduct of Accused
4. Applicability of Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act

Summary:

1. Proof of Suicide:

Ravinder Kaur, married to Satpal Singh in November 1982, died on June 25, 1983, due to second to third degree burns with kerosene oil on her body. The trial court established that she committed suicide due to the cruel behavior of her in-laws, who taunted her for bringing insufficient dowry and insinuated that she was carrying an illegitimate child. The High Court, however, acquitted the accused, stating the prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt.

2. Abetment of Suicide u/s 306 IPC:

The trial court held that the accused abetted the suicide of Ravinder Kaur, punishable under Section 306 IPC, based on the evidence of her father, Gurbachan Singh, and her sisters. The accused's conduct, including not attempting to save her and delaying informing her parents, corroborated the inference of abetment. The High Court disagreed, finding no direct evidence of instigation or abetment by the accused at the time of the suicide.

3. Evidence and Conduct of Accused:

The trial court found sufficient evidence of the accused's cruel behavior and persistent demands for dowry, which led to Ravinder Kaur's suicide. The absence of burn injuries on the accused indicated they did not attempt to save her. The High Court, however, noted contradictions in the prosecution's evidence and questioned the delay in lodging the FIR, leading to the acquittal of the accused.

4. Applicability of Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act:

The trial court applied Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act, which presumes abetment of suicide by a married woman within seven years of marriage if subjected to cruelty by her husband or his relatives. The High Court did not consider this provision, leading to the acquittal. The Supreme Court held that Section 113-A, being procedural, applies retrospectively and supports the trial court's findings.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, affirming the conviction and sentence of the accused under Section 306 IPC, and directed the respondents to surrender to serve the remaining period of their sentence.