LexRAMESH KUMAR versus STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
RAMESH KUMAR A v. ST ATE OF CHHA TTISGARH OCTOBER 17, 2001 [DR. A.S. ANAND, C.J. R.C. LAHOTI AND K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.] B Penal Code 1860 : Sections 107 and 306-Abetment-Meaning of-Instigation-A word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation-A reasonable certainity to incite the consequence must be capable of being ~pelt out-In absence of evidence adduced of the accused having abetted the deceased to commit suicide-Hence, conviction under Section 306 set aside. c Sections 498-A and 306 : Distinction between-Merely because an ac- D cused held liable to be punished under Section 498-A it does not.follow that on the same eviden.ce he must also and necessarily be held guilty of having abetted commission of suicide-Since cruelty is proved, conviction under Section 498- A maintained. Evidence Act, I 872 : Section I13-A-Suicide by a married woman-Presumption as to abet- ment-Presumption is not mandatory but permissive as expression "may pre- sume" suggests-Court to have regard to the other circumstances-Cause and effect relationship between cruelty and suicide must be established to raise presumption. · Dying declaration-Principle that truth sits on the lips of dying per- sons-Held, such principle shall also be applicable when such declaration exonerates the accused unless material on record shows that deceased was trying to conceal truth or persuaded to do so. One 'S' was married to the accused-appellant and within one year of marriage, she committed suicide. She had left a suicide note and a letter to her husband in a diary. Her dying declaration was recorded by Tehsildar E .F G and Executive Magistrate. The families of father of deceased, her elder sister and accused-appellant were all residents of different localities in H 247 248. SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2001) SUPP. 4 S.C.R. A Raipur and were on visiting terms. The finding of guilt as recorded by the Trial Court rests on the testimony of five witnesses, namely, parents, brother, sister and sister's husband of the deceased as also documentary evidence including an un- dated letter written by deceased to her father. The appellant was convicted B and sentenced for offences under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC. It was affirmed by the High Court. Hence this appeal. c D E F Partly allowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1.1. A very material piece of evidence in this case is an undated letter written by the deceased to her father. The letter has to be read as it is and inferences have to be drawn therefrom, based on expres- simi employed therein and in the light of other evidence adduced. The letter nowhere indicates any demand of dowry having been made by the accused or deceased having been pressurised for bringing more dowry. [253-B; 254-B-C] L2. The finding as' to' demand for dowry by the accused has b~en arrived at by the Trial Court and the· High Court by placing reliance on stray general allegations and by ignoring facts on record which demol- ished the theory of any demand for dowry. The reading of the entire evidence shows that the present one is a case of marital mat-adjustment between the deceased and the a~cused. This is also borne out from writing in the form of essays written by the deceased acknowledging the love and affection which the accused-appellant had for her and also that she did not have a compromising attitude and, therefore, the accused-appellant got annoyed over minor mistakes committed by her. (255-A-B-C-D] 1.3. In the light of oral evidence adduced and from an independent evaluation of evidence, the present case is not a case of dowry death or the deceased having been instigated into committing suicide for her failure to satisfy the dowry demands of the accused appellant. However, ill-treating G of the deceased for even her pardonable mistakes and turning her out of the house and beating her did amount to cruelty. Therefore, conviction under Section 498-A is maintained. [255-E-F] · 2.1. There is no direct evidence adduced of the accused-appellant having abetted · deceased into committing suicide. The prosecution has H relied on Section 113-A of the Evidence Act which talks of presumption as .. .... RAMESH KUMAR v. STATE 249 to abetment of suicide by a married woman. However, before the presump- A tion of abetment of suicide is raised, the fµundation thereof must exist. It must be shown that
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.