JUDGMENT : ( 1. ) This is the appeal of the two accused Harish Chandra and Rajendra, who on their conviction under S.306 of the I.P.C. have each been sentenced to three years R.I. ( 2. ) The appellants-accused Harishchandra and Rajendra are brothers, the latter being younger in age. Mst. Minabai (now deceased), who was the daughter of P.W. 2 Bhikamchand and P.W. 6 Mst. Bhagwati, resident of village Bhategaon, had been married to Rajendra on 20-2-1981. Mst. Minabai had been living with her husband, her in-laws and other members of the family on the second floor of their house situate in Morai Mohalla Indore, and some tenants including P.W. 4 Satishkumar were occupants of other floors of the house. On 17-10-1982, Mst. Mina was found dead in her room of the second floor of the house with hundred per cent burns. Tenants and others were the first to discover this fact; and the appellants-accused who were away from the house at the relevant time had reached the place just some time after. ( 3. ) The case of the prosecution, in brief, was that after the marriage, the appellants-accused and the deceaseds in-laws used to often harass Mst. Mina due to insufficient dowry, received by them, in the marriage. Deceaseds father Bhikamchand had given Rs. 5000/- to his son-in-law viz. the appellant-accused Rajendra, just before he had gone abroad. On his return from the foreign trip, the appellants-accused had demanded Rs. 5000/- for purchase of a T.V. set, with the threat, that, in case the amount was not paid, Mst. Mina would not be seen alive. Mst. Mina, now deceased, had also written a letter to her parents to fulfil their such demand. This demand was, however, never fulfilled, and consequently, came the end of Mst. Mina, who burnt herself to death in the house of her in-laws. P.W. 12 Kushwaha, Officer of Police Station Chhoti Gwaltoli, on learning of the incident at about 11-30 a.m. on 17-10-1982, has rushed to the place, had prepared the last panchnama of the deceased (Ex.P/4), had made the seizure of the articles found at the place and had then got the post-mortem done. During investigation, some letters were seized. ( 4. P.W. 12 Kushwaha, Officer of Police Station Chhoti Gwaltoli, on learning of the incident at about 11-30 a.m. on 17-10-1982, has rushed to the place, had prepared the last panchnama of the deceased (Ex.P/4), had made the seizure of the articles found at the place and had then got the post-mortem done. During investigation, some letters were seized. ( 4. ) After due investigation, both the appellants-accused were put up for trial for committing offence u/s. 306 of the I.P.C. They abjured the guilt in the trial court and denied to have harassed the deceased Mina to any extent. It was contended by them that they were sufficiently affluent; and as such, had no reason to demand any money from the deceaseds parents nor had they demanded any amount from them at any time whatsoever for any purpose. It was equally contended that the deceaseds parents had just falsely implicated them, out of sheer vengeance, inasmuch as, the appellants-accused and their father were not prepared to shell out Rs. 5,000/-, which the deceaseds father and brother Kailash, were keen to extract from them for their own business. In support of their contention, Kailashs letter (Ex.P-4) was produced. No other evidence however, was adduced in defence. ( 5. ) The trial Court disbelieved the defence; and relying on the oral testimonies of the deceaseds parents, her brother P.W. 11 Kailash and cousin P.W. 10 Mahendra and so also the circumstances, attending the suicide committed, came to hold the view that the appellants-accused had caused so much physical and mental torture to Mst. Mina and had caused such persistent threats to her and to her parents in the matter of insufficiency of initial dowry given, and equally in the matter of their consequent demands of money from her parents, that Mst. Mina was forced to commit suicide; and thus, the appellants-accused had abetted the commission of suicide. Accordingly, the appellants-accused were convicted and sentenced to the extent, as stated at the outset. Hence, now, the present appeal. ( 6. ) S/Shri J.P. Gupta and Bhojwani, learned counsel for the appellants-accused have vehemently argued that the material evidence on the prosecution side is so discrepant and mutually conflicting that the prosecution case stands exposed to be sheer concoction. Accordingly, the appellants-accused were convicted and sentenced to the extent, as stated at the outset. Hence, now, the present appeal. ( 6. ) S/Shri J.P. Gupta and Bhojwani, learned counsel for the appellants-accused have vehemently argued that the material evidence on the prosecution side is so discrepant and mutually conflicting that the prosecution case stands exposed to be sheer concoction. It is argued in this context that the appellants-accused and their family are sufficiently affluent, needing no money, by way of dowry or otherwise from the parents of Mina, now deceased. The fact that the appellants-accused had no dearth of money and that they had no reason to demand any, from Mst. Minas parents, is tried to be supported by the circumstances that they had themselves given more than 33 tolas of gold-ornaments to Mst. Mina, by way of marriage-gift at the time of marriage and had also made a fixed deposit of Rs. 11000/- in her name in the Canara Bank Indore; and in such circumstances, it was preposterous for the appellants-accused to demand the petty amount of Rs. 5000/- from Mst. Minas parents for purchase of a T.V. set. It is urged that when Mst. Minas husband had gone abroad on his own, and had spent a huge amount in this regard, it was sheerly improbable for him or for his brother to beg for a petty amount of Rs. 5000/-, just for purchasing a T.V. set. Learned Government Advocate Shri Solanki has, however, urged that the greed for money knows no bounds; and a person, even if affluent, can well pressurise and squeeze his in-laws, for getting easy-money, as a bargain to keep his spouse in peace and comfort. According to the learned Government Advocate, due to failure and reluctance on the part of Mst. Minas in-laws to satisfy the appellants demand for money, the appellants-accused had tortured Mst. Mina, leading to her suicide which was the direct result of the appellants-accuseds abetment. ( 7. ) I have scrutinized the evidence on record and the trial Courts judgment, in the light of respective arguments, pressed. The appellants-accused have been convicted of the offence under S.306 of the I.P.C. for abetment of suicide. The appellants learned counsel, to start with, have tried to cast doubt on the prosecution theory of suicide and have contended that the case of Mst. The appellants-accused have been convicted of the offence under S.306 of the I.P.C. for abetment of suicide. The appellants learned counsel, to start with, have tried to cast doubt on the prosecution theory of suicide and have contended that the case of Mst. Minas death may well not be a suicide, but an accident, inasmuch as, the stove and the Pateli (brassvessel) had been seized by the police (Ex.P.8) from the place of the incident. There is actually no material on record to probabilise the theory of accidental death, as tried to be suggested. ( 8. ) P.W.12 Police Investigation Officer Kushwaha and the attesting witness P.W. 5 Madanmohan have duly proved the seizure memo Ex.P.8, which shows, not only the seizure of the stove and a brass-vessel full of water but also shows the seizure of partly burnt quilt, double bed-sheet and the lamp cover. Police Investigation Officer is not found to have been cross-examined at all in the matter of this seizure Ex.P-8. The smell of kerosene oil is found to be there on various items, seized from the place and also the, deceaseds clothes. Considering all this material, Mst. Minas death is patently found to be a case of suicide, and not of any accident, for which, there is absolutely no iota of evidence whatsoever. Therefore, there is no scope for doubt that Mst. Mina had committed suicide. ( 9. ) Before considering the ocular evidence of the material prosecution witnesses viz. the deceaseds parents and her two brothers and the documentary evidence in the form of some letters which are on record, it is necessary to see at first whether all, such evidence is admissible being within the legitimate scope of S.32(1) of the Evidence Act. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court, in their recent decision in AIR 1984 SC 1622 , Sharad v. State of Maharashtra, relying on the leading decision on the question, in the case of Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor, AIR 1939 PC 47, and the Locus Classicus of their own earlier decision in AIR 1952 SC 343 , and after considering the interpretation of S.32(1) ibid as made in AIR 1959 SC 18 , Ratan Gond v. State of Bihar, have, after their review of these authorities and others, formulated certain propositions as per the clear language of S.32 ibid, widening the sphere of S.32, to avoid injustice. These propositions are stated in para 21 of this reported decision. The proposition laid down is that S.32 is an exception to the rule of hearsay, making admissible the statement of a person who dies whether the death is a homicide or a suicide, provided the statement relates to the cause of death, or exhibits circumstances leading to the death. ( 10. ) As regards the test of proximity regarding the circumstantial evidence, be it in the form of the statements or the letters written, the material propositions propounded in AIR 1984 SC 1622 , as relevant for purposes of the present case are reproduced hereunder for proper appreciation : "The test of proximity cannot be too literally construed and practically reduced to a cutand dried formula of universal application so as to be confined in a strait-jacket. Distance of time would depend or vary with the circumstances of each case. For instance, where death is a logical culmination of a continuous drama of the story, the statement regarding each step directly connected with the end of the drama would be admissible because the entire statement would have to be read as an organic whole and not torn from the context. Sometimes statements relevant to or furnishing an immediate motive may also be admissible as being a part of the transaction of death. It is manifest that all these statements come to light only after the death of the deceased who speaks from death. For instance, where the death takes place within a very short time of the marriage or the distance of time is not spread over more than 3-4 months the statement may be admissible under S.32. ............... (page 1630 of AIR. Where the main evidence consists of statements and letters written by the deceased which are directly connected with or related to her death and which reveal a tell-tale story, the said statement would clearly fall within the four corners of S.32 and, therefore, admissible. The distance of time alone in such cases would not make the statement irrelevant." In the light of the tests above, the oral testimonies of the deceaseds parents P.W. 2 Bhikamchand and P.W. 6 Mst. Bhagwati, deceaseds brother P.W. 11 Kailash and the cousin P.W. 10 Mahendra and so also the particular two letters Exs. The distance of time alone in such cases would not make the statement irrelevant." In the light of the tests above, the oral testimonies of the deceaseds parents P.W. 2 Bhikamchand and P.W. 6 Mst. Bhagwati, deceaseds brother P.W. 11 Kailash and the cousin P.W. 10 Mahendra and so also the particular two letters Exs. D-3 and D-3-A written by the deceaseds sister to the deceased and her husband, and the third letter Ex. D-4 admittedly written by P.W. 11 Kailash to his brother- in-law viz. the appellant-accused No. 2 Rajendra are obviously found to come within the purview of S.32(1) of the Evidence Act, inasmuch as, all these statements and all these letters pertain to the period, quite close in proximity, prior to the suicide in question. The trial Court, therefore, is found to be right in admitting all such evidence, both oral and documentary. ( 11. ) Now, on scrutinizing the evidence of the material prosecution witnesses, it is noticed that these material witnesses Bhikamchand, his wife Mst. Bhagwati, son Kailash and the nephew-Mahendra have tried to gradually improve the prosecution story - each adding new facts regarding demand of dowry and regarding harassment and beating, given to Mst. Mina now deceased. P. W. 2 Bhikamchand has, nowhere, stated in his examination-in-chief that his daughter Mst. Mina was ill-treated, harassed or was being beaten by the appellants-accused or their mother. He only states that his daughter had complained to him, only this much, that the appellants-accused and the members of their family taken hard drinks i.e. liquor. He has, however, also stated that the appellants-accused and their parents had demanded Rs. 10,000/- after the marriage towards dowry, since the dowry initially given was insufficient (paras 4 and 2 of P.W. 2). It may also incidentally be stated that Bhikams oral testimony in the matter of dowry demand is exposed to be a lie on his being confronted with his earlier police statement Ex. D-2, wherein, the material facts as deposed to, by him in his evidence, are not found to be stated at all. ( 12. ) This story, as given by P.W. 2 Bhikamchand, deceased by her husband and her in-laws, at the time of his earlier statement under S.164 of the Code, recorded before the Magistrate, with which, he has been confronted (Ex. D-6) (sic). ( 12. ) This story, as given by P.W. 2 Bhikamchand, deceased by her husband and her in-laws, at the time of his earlier statement under S.164 of the Code, recorded before the Magistrate, with which, he has been confronted (Ex. D-6) (sic). It is obvious that his oral testimony regarding beating is sheer concoction. ( 13. ) As regards the demand of Rs. 10,000/- by the appellants-accused and their parents to make up the deficiency in the dowry initially paid, there is no cogent evidence worth the name. P.W. 2 Bhikamchand has deposed that he had given Rs. 5,000/- to his son-in-law viz. the appellant-accused No. 2 Rajendra, just before the latter had gone abroad, and this amount, he had given, so that, his daughter may live happily. Thus, this payment, if any, was just a gratuitous and not a forced one. So far as the further demand of Rs. 5,000/- is concerned, the evidence in this regard is obviously found to be concocted. In the matter of this demand, it is stated by Bhikamchand, his wife and his son Kailash that the appellants-accused and their parents had threatened them to give this amount of Rs. 5,000/- for purchasing a T.V. set, or else Mst. Mina would be killed and the parents would not be able to see her alive. According to the evidence of the parents and the brother Kailash, the deceased had written a specific letter to her parents in this regard. Bhikamchand has deposed that he had given this letter to the police. The Police Sub-Inspector P.W. 12 Kishwaha has deposed that he had not been handed any such letter by Bhikamchand or anyone else of his family. ( 14. ) P.W. 2 Bhikamchands wife P.W. 6 Bhagwati has, outright, contradicted her husbands version, and has deposed that Mst. Mina had never written any letter to her parents regarding the appellants-accuseds demand for Rs. 5,000/- for purchasing the T.V. Further contrary statement is of P.W. 11 Kailash, who, demolishing the versions of his parents, has come out, with an altogether different statement to the effect that he had torn out this letter, even without showing it to his parents. Such inconsistencies in their respective averments, go to belie their story regarding any demand of Rs. Such inconsistencies in their respective averments, go to belie their story regarding any demand of Rs. 5,000/- by the appellants for purchasing the T.V. There is also inconsistency in the averments of these witnesses, inasmuch as, at one place, one of these witnesses has spoken regarding the demand of Rs. 5,000/- not for purchase of T.V. set but for purchase of a V.C.R., in some Arab country, which the appellant Rajendra had planned to visit. ( 15. ) The alleged demand of Rs. 5,000/- or be it Rs. 10,000/- prima facie appears to be sheer concoction, considering the financial status of the appellants-accused and their family. Despite evasive replies, given by Bhikamchand and his wife during the course of their respective cross-examination, it clearly emerges from their own evidence that the deceased, at the time of her marriage had been given about 33 tolas of gold ornaments by the appellants-accuseds parents. Not only that, fixed deposit is found to be made in the name of the deceased on 11-1-1982 in Canara Bank Indore as is evident from the original fixed deposit receipt. Evidence both of Bhikamchand and his wife equally shows that the deceaseds in-laws, at the time of marriage had held a lavish dinner, incurring huge expenditure, to celebrate the marriage of their son Rajendra with Mst. Mina now deceased. ( 16. ) Then again, Rajendra (appellant-accused No. 2) is found to have gone abroad on his own, and from his own money. Such was the affluence and the financial status of the appellants-accused and their parents, and hence, it prima facie appears to be preposterous that the appellants-accused or their parents could stoop so low, as to demand the petty amount of Rs. 5,000/- for purchase of a T.V., under threat to kill Mst. Mina, if the demand was not met. The allegation in this regard is obviously weird and does not appeal to reason in the least. ( 17. ) Then again, the other attending circumstances, equally belie the prosecution story regarding the alleged harassment and torture meted out to Mst. Mina, now deceased, at her in-laws house. Mina, if the demand was not met. The allegation in this regard is obviously weird and does not appeal to reason in the least. ( 17. ) Then again, the other attending circumstances, equally belie the prosecution story regarding the alleged harassment and torture meted out to Mst. Mina, now deceased, at her in-laws house. P.W. 4 Satish Kumar who is the tenant of the appellants father in the very house, where the appellants admittedly did live, has stated in his cross-examination that he was a regular visitor to the house of the appellants-accused, and he had never seen the appellants-accused or their parents quarrelling with Mst. Mina or causing her any harassment or giving her any torture. He has deposed that he often used to see both husband and wife going together for their outings and for seeing cinema shows. Had there been any harassment and torture, the tenants or other neighbours would have at least said something in this regard. The two letters Exs. D-3 and D-4 written by Kailash and, the third letter Ex. D-3A, written by Rekha, to their sister Mst. Mina, now deceased and her husband, viz. the appellant-accused Rajendra, do not give the least indication regarding any sufferings of the deceased. On the contrary, letters Exts. D-3 and D-3A fairly indicate that these letters were in reply to the letters which they had received from their sister Mst. Mina. These letters amply show that Mst. Mina, in her letters, had not complained to them in the least, regarding any harassment or ill-treatment at the house of her in-laws. ( 18. ) Kailashs letter Ex. D-4 presents no incriminating material against the appellants-accused or the members of their family. On the contrary, Kailash, by this letter, is found to have repeatedly expressed his remorse and repentance to his brother-in-law viz. the appellant-accused No. 2 Rajendra for his certain misconduct. What that misconduct was, is not stated in this letter, nor has Kailash in the course of his evidence, thrown any light in this regard. It is in the light of what has been stated in this letter Ex. D-4, that the appellants-accused are found to have suggested to Kailash during his cross-examination that this repentance was for the reason that he had demanded Rs. 5,000/- from the appellants and their father for his own business, which demand had been refused by them. It is in the light of what has been stated in this letter Ex. D-4, that the appellants-accused are found to have suggested to Kailash during his cross-examination that this repentance was for the reason that he had demanded Rs. 5,000/- from the appellants and their father for his own business, which demand had been refused by them. Defence suggestion which had been put to Kailash in this regard is, to my mind, a concoction which the appellants-accused had ingeniously contrived by taking advantage of the ambiguities in Kailash letter. ( 19. ) Anyway, irrespective of ingenuity of the defence-stand which is without any rational foundation, this much is certain from the prosecution evidence, that the prosecution story regarding harassment and ill-treatment of Mst. Mina at the hands of the appellants-accused and their parents and their demand of further dowry in cash, from Mst. Minas parents is sheer concoction built up as an afterthought, only after Mst. Mina had committed suicide at her in-laws place at the particular time and hour, when the appellants-accused and also other members of their family were all away and not present in the house. ( 20. ) The law is well settled that it is the intentional aiding and active complicity which forms the gist of the offence of abetment of suicide. There is no cogent and convincing evidence on record that any overt or covert act or conduct on the part of the appellants-accused had contributed to the commission of suicide by Mst. Mina. In the absence of any cogent proof regarding any sustained cruelty, ill-treatment, or, harassment to Mst. Mina by the appellants-accused, they cannot be held to have excited or instigated the prosecutrix to commit suicide. No doubt, Mst. Mina had committed suicide, but what drove her to kill herself is not found to be something, directly resulting from any instigation or incitement by the appellants-accused. Mst. Mina may well have been in some unhappy state of mind, when she had decided to kill herself by self immolation. But, one knows not as to why, she had come to have such an unhappy state of mind. The cause of her such immolation, in the absence of cogent evidence, just remains a matter of surmise. It could, well, be then consequence of her own frustration and pessimism, she might have been impelled to end her life. But, one knows not as to why, she had come to have such an unhappy state of mind. The cause of her such immolation, in the absence of cogent evidence, just remains a matter of surmise. It could, well, be then consequence of her own frustration and pessimism, she might have been impelled to end her life. She could, well, be a sensitive and sentimental woman, not liking the drinking-habits of the appellants-accused or their weakness for non-vegetarian food. The way of life of the appellants-accused and their habits of food and drinks, being not to the liking of the orthodox Mst. Mina, could, well, have filled her with frustration and pessimism, prompting her to end her life, with the feeling of her own, that she did not fit well in the particular social environment of the appellants-accused and their family, so as to adjust herself in the new surroundings. The appellants-accused cannot be held responsible for such suicide, resulting from her own psychotic or emotional disorders; and as such, they cannot be held to have abetted Mst. Mina for committing suicide in the particular circumstances, when they had not instigated Mst. Mina in the least, to end her life. The appellants-accused, therefore, being not guilty of the offence under S.306 of the I.P.C., are entitled for acquittal. ( 21. ) In the result, the appeal is allowed. Setting aside the order of conviction and sentence as passed by the trial Court against the appellants-accused under S.306 of the I.P.C., it is ordered that the appellants-accused be and are now acquitted of the said offence. Their bail bonds are discharged. Appeal allowed.