SURENDER versus STATE OF HARYANA

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 9 S.C.R. 296 · Decided: 22-11-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
SURENDER 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA 
NOVEMBER 22, 2006 
[S.B. SINHA AND MARKANDEY KA TIU, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860-Sections 306/34·and 498 A/34-Conviction under-
Correctness of-Suicide by wife within 7 years ofmarriage due to dow1y 
C demand and cruelty meted out to her by her husband and in-laws-Evidence 
substantiating the same-Wife_pregnant at the time of suicide, and ordinarily 
such women would commit suicide only under compulsion-Also for offence 
under s. 306 not necessary that express words to be used to show instigation-
Thus, conviction ofhusband by courts below justified. 
D 
According to the prosecution case, P was married to the appellant in 
E 
F 
the year 1994. She was harassed by the appellant and his parents on account 
of demand of dowry and was also beaten up which compelled her to commit 
suicide by hanging in 2002. Appellant and his parents were convicted and 
sentenced under s. 306/34 and 498A/34 IPC. High Court acquitted the parents 
but upheld conviction of the appellant. Hence the present appeal. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. Both the courts below have held against the accused and the 
reasoning given in the judgment by the courts below are concurred with. 
(302-D-EJ 
2.1. It cannot be said that no offence has been made under section 306 
IPC because there is nothing to show any intention to abet or urge the deceased 
to commit suicide. High Court observed that "to instigate means to goad, urge, 
provoke, incite or encourage someone to do an act. It is not necessary that 
express words should be used in order to instigate. The offence of abetment 
G by instigation depends upon the intention of the person who abets and not upon 
the act which is done by the person who has abetted". (301-F-GJ 
2.2. It has come in the evidence of PW 2- mother of the deceased, PW4-
maternal uncle of the deceased, and PW 10-father of the deceased that the 
deceased P had been harassed due to the demands of dowry. Two and a half 
H 
~ 
. 
. 
SURENDER v. STATE OF HARYANA [MARKANDEY KATJU, J.] 
297 
years after marriage, P gave birth to girl child and that time also her father A 
gave sufficient gifts but the appellants were not satisfied. About six months 
prior to the occurrence, the appellant visited the house of the maternal uncle 
of the deceased and demanded money. However, when PW-4 refused to pay the 
amount, appellant started beating the deceased and ultimately she was turned 
out of the matrimonial house and went to her parents' house where she stayed B 
for about three months. Thereafter she was taken back by the appellant with 
the assurance that he will treat P well, but ten days thereafter she committed 
suicide. PW 4 has produced a letter which was received by PW 2, perusal of 
which shows that P's father-in-law and mother-in-law had stopped saying 
anything to P but her husband had given severe beating to her to the extent 
that she had become incapacitated and was unable to walk. It has also come in C 
evidence of PW-I 0 that when the demand for dowry was not met, P was beaten 
and she had injury marks when she came to her father's house. 
(301-G-H; 302-A-D) 
2.3. The deceased was pregnant at the time of the suicide. High Court 
rightly held that a young pregnant women having a child in the womb would 
not ordinarily commit suicide unless she was compelled to do so; and that 
she would not have felt depressed if she had not been harassed on account of 
demand for dowry: (302-B-C) 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 1262 of 
2005. 
From the Filial Ju9gment and Order dated 24-2-2003 of the High Court 
of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Crl. A. No. 1827-SB/2002. 
D 
E 
B.S. Mor, Gian Singh and Mahinder Singh. Dahiya for the Appellant. 
Manjit Singh, Addi. Adv. Gen., Harikesh Singh and T. V. George for the F 
Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
MARKANDEY KATJU, J. This appeal has been filed against the 
impugne·d judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court dated 24.2.2003 in G 
Criminal Appeal No. 1827 of2002. 
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 
Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the deceased Pushpa was 
the third daughter of PW-10 Dilbag Singh. She was married. to appellant H 
298 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2006] SUPP. 9 S.C.R. 
A Surender in village Aasan in the year 1994 according to Hindu rites. and 
ceremonies. At that time, Dilbag Singh had given sufficient dowry but the 
appellants were not satisfied with t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.