P. C. PATHAK, J. ( 1 ) ASHOK Kumar and his father Ghasiram have challenged their conviction under Section 306, I. P. C. , and sentences of R. I. for five years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default R. I. for six months each. ( 2 ) DECEASED Shilabai was married to Ashok Kumar about two and half years before and gaona ceremony took place two years before the date of incident i. e. 2-8-1987. Accused Ghasiram informed police station Kirnapur in district Balaghat that his daughter-in-laws dead body was seen in a well. According to him, the deceased after fetching 4 or 5 pots of water, did not return and, therefore, he made a search for her. On suspicion he went to the well and found her dead body in it. The report was recorded in Rojnamcha Sanha No. 48, dated 2-8-1983 and on its basis a Marg intimation (Ex. P. 9) was prepared. After holding inquest (Ex. P. 3), the police sent the body for postmortem. Dr. H. K. Kamde (P. W. 10) could not give any opinion as to the cause of her death in his report (Ex. PA ). He found multiple abrasions, postmortem in nature, on the medial side of her right breast. He preserved the viscera for being sent to the Chemical Examiner. On request (Ex. P. 13) by police, the Chemical Examiner found organa phosporus pesticide demicron as per report Ex. P. 14. The police made further enquiry vide Ex. P. 6, from the doctor who gave his reply (Ex. P. 6a) that the pesticide found in her body is poisonous and the fatal dose is about 100 Mg. , which could cause death within half an hour to three hours. Patwari Narain Bisen (P. W. 11) prepared as spot map (Ex. P. 7), while another map (Ex. P. 35) was prepared by station Officer Ajit Kumar Patel (P. W. 18 ). The police also recorded F. I. R. (Ex. P. 34) and filed charge-sheet against the appellants and Mst. Shakubai (since acquitted ). Charges under Sections 306 and 201, I. P. C. , were framed against all the accused persons. They denied commission of any offence. Both the appellants pleaded that while pulling water from the well, the deceased may have slipped into the well. They did not examine any witness to defence. Shakubai (since acquitted ). Charges under Sections 306 and 201, I. P. C. , were framed against all the accused persons. They denied commission of any offence. Both the appellants pleaded that while pulling water from the well, the deceased may have slipped into the well. They did not examine any witness to defence. The learned trial Court acquitted all the accused of the charge under Section 201. Accused Shakubai was also acquitted of the charge under Section 306, I. P. C. The two appellants were however convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. Hence this appeal. ( 3 ) QUESTION for decision is whether Shilabaits death was suicidal or accidental. There is no direct evidence to prove it. Sewanbai (P. W. 6), who lives near the well stated that she had seen Shilabai twice but not the third time, going to the well to collect water. Appellant Ashokts cousin Bhimabai accompanied the deceased. At about 7 -8 A. M. she learnt that the deceased died in the well. Bhimabai (P. W. 7) stated that she fetched 4-5 pitchers of water from that well along with Shilabai. Even though she stated that Shilabai died due to fall in the well, she admitted that the well is not visible from her house and had stopped fetching water in order to do house hold work. Shilabai continued collecting water from the well. She did not see her either jumping or falling into the well. She also admitted that Shilabai was hale and hearty, was not depressed nor she made any complaint to her. Shakubai, Ashokts mother, enquired from Bhimabai why Shilabai had not returned. She did not find her at the well. Bhimabais statement is that her pot was at the well, does not appear to be truthful since no other witness deposed about it. Had there being any such pot at the well, Shakubai was bound to bring it back, when she found no trace of the deceased. Shakubai made no such statement to her. ( 4 ) ON postmortem, Dr. Kamde (P. W. 10) found her face swellen, eyes and mouth closed, haemorrhage from nostrils and on pressing the chest, bloody froth came out of the nostrils/she had postmortem abrassions on her right breast. No blood was coming out from ear. Vagiilal opening, trachea oesophegus, mucose, liver and spleen all were congested. Both the chambers of heart had blood. Kamde (P. W. 10) found her face swellen, eyes and mouth closed, haemorrhage from nostrils and on pressing the chest, bloody froth came out of the nostrils/she had postmortem abrassions on her right breast. No blood was coming out from ear. Vagiilal opening, trachea oesophegus, mucose, liver and spleen all were congested. Both the chambers of heart had blood. Other internal organs were healthy and normal. According to him, the death took place within 36 hours of the postmortem. He could not give any opinion as to cause of death in his report. (Ex. P. 4-A ). The chemical Examiner found Organo phosphorus pesticide in the viscera. The doctor opined that the pesticide is poisonous, the fatal dose being 100 Mgs. , the death takes place within 112 to 3 hours. In cross-examination, he stated that after consuming the pesticide its reaction will immediately start. Symptoms of vomiting, mascular, cramps, dimness of the vision will appear within half an hour of the intake, On appearance of these symptoms it is not possible for the patient to undertake routine work e. g. to carry a pot to well, pull water and return with pot of water. The postmortem appearance suggested asphyxial death. He admitted that there were no symptoms of death by drowning; namely water or any congestion in her stomach and lungs. He did not dispute that if a person falls into the well, he may suffer death by heart failure due to shock even before coming in contact with the water and in such a case, water will not be present in the stomach. ( 5 ) MODI in Section, II Toxicology of his Jurisprudence, XXI Edt. describes, the symptoms of Organo Phosphorus poison at page 66, as under:symptoms - According to route of entry the respiratory or gastro-intestinal symptoms are more marked. Early headache, nauses, giddiness, anorexia, tightness of chest, oppression, dimness of vision, miosis; caused by the local effect of spray mist in the eyes, twitching of the eye muscles, tremulous tongue and profuse frothing. Late: vomiting, sweating, salivation, oronasal froth, pallor, apprehension, incordination, twitching of voluntary muscles accompanied with severe muscular weakness, mental confusion, diarrhoea, tenesumus, delirium, weakness and paralysis or respiratory muscles, areflexia, incontinence, bronchospasm, cyanosis, pulmonary oedema, convulsions, coma and death. Late: vomiting, sweating, salivation, oronasal froth, pallor, apprehension, incordination, twitching of voluntary muscles accompanied with severe muscular weakness, mental confusion, diarrhoea, tenesumus, delirium, weakness and paralysis or respiratory muscles, areflexia, incontinence, bronchospasm, cyanosis, pulmonary oedema, convulsions, coma and death. Paralysis of limb muscles as a sequel has been reported;t The postmortem appearance mentioned by him at pages 66 and 61 is as under: Post-Mortem Appearances. Suggest asphyxial death, M. R. Limye Reporting on 76 necropsies found congested face, dried oronasal blood stained froth, acute pulmonary oedema and sometimes soft flabby heart muscle. The stomach content;> were sometimes blood stained, mucosa was congested and submucous petechial haemorrhages were seen in may. In the brain petechial haemorrhages were seen in 8 cases and surface ochymosis in 3 cases. Special staining techniques and estimation of the level of cholinesterase activity in the blood which is reduced is agnostic, but the severity of the symptoms and the degree of cholinesterase depression are not necessarily correlated. ( 6 ) THE learned trial Court did not accept the prosecution case that Shilabais dead body was thrown in the well, solely on the ground that no witness deposed to that effect and accepted the doctorts opinion that Shilabai, after consuming the pesticide, may have jumped into the well, but suffered her heart failure due to shock before drowning into the water. This conclusion does not appear to be correct inasmuch as the doctor categorically stated and so is Modits opinion that after consuming the poison, the patient could not undertake routine work. Therefore, it is not possible to accept that after consuming pesticide, Shilabai could have walked to the well with a pot to fetch water and while pulling, either she jumped into the well or she fell in it by accident. Had she been drowned the doctor should have found postmortem symptoms of drowning which are completely missing in the present case. The deceased was seen hale and hearty during her trips to the well. There-fore, the only possibility is that Shilabai either consumed and or was administered the pesticide and her dead body was drowned into the well. No other conclusion is possible on account of the postmortem symptoms. There could be many reasons why no witness came forward to depose that her dead body was thrown by the appellants or any other person at their behest into the well. No other conclusion is possible on account of the postmortem symptoms. There could be many reasons why no witness came forward to depose that her dead body was thrown by the appellants or any other person at their behest into the well. This is altogether a different issue, but it is inescapable that the death took place outside the well and the body was thrown into the well afterwards. The post-mortem abrassions on her right breast may be due to the part coming into contact with the wall of the well. Had she slipped into the well as suggested by the defence, the abrassions should have been ante mortem and symptoms of death by drowning should have been found in postmortem. I, therefore, hold that Shilabai died as a result of suicide committed by her and not by accident. ( 7 ) NEXT question for decision is whether the appellants abated the deceased to commit suicide. There is no direct evidence to prove abatement as defined in section 107 I. P. C. The prosecution relies on circumstantial evidence. Ramanbai (P. W. 1), mother of the deceased, stated that the deceased had studied upto tenth standard and was married to Ashok two and half years before. One day before the Holi festival, the deceased returned to her house along with Ashok Kumar and her nephew Ramandbai (P. W. 2), and lived for 3 or 4 days. During her stay, the deceased told her that Ashok Kumar does not accept meals prepared by her; does not sleep with her or talk to her. He does not treat her properly. Two months thereafter she went to bring her back. The deceased told her that Ashok demands cycle, radio and cash of Rs. 2,000/ -. She apprehended danger to her life at the hands of the Ashok. Ashok continued not to share her bed, beat her frequently and did not take meals served by her. She also reported that even her father-in-law was hostile to her, since he always criticised her cooking and house-hold work. After consoling her she again sent her back to Ashoks house. Fifteen days thereafter she received a message that Shila was serious and she should come immediately if she wanted to meet her. She also reported that even her father-in-law was hostile to her, since he always criticised her cooking and house-hold work. After consoling her she again sent her back to Ashoks house. Fifteen days thereafter she received a message that Shila was serious and she should come immediately if she wanted to meet her. When she went to appellantts house along with Ramandas (P. W. 2), Bhimarao (P. W. 5), Bhaudas (P. W. 9) and Yashodabai (P. W. 8) to her utter surprise, she found Shilabai hale and hearty. Upon her enquiry Ashok replied that the deceased attempted to throttle him. The deceased countered the charge and explained that her effort to shower love was misconstrued by him. She also informed that Ashokts demands for radio, cycle and money persisted. Ashok dislikes even to bathe in the water fetched by her. ( 8 ) ON the next day, Ramanbai reported the matter to the Panchayat. Appellant Ghasiram repeated the demands for radio, cycle and money if she wished the welfare of the deceased. After return her to the village, she sent, Bhimrao, Dulichand etc. to pursuade the appellant not to continue ill- treatment to her daughter. On return these persons informed her that in the Panchayat, both appellants admitted their mistakes and gave undertaking to maintain her decently. Ten or twelve days thereafter, she learnt that Shila fell into the well. During cross-examination, she was confronted with certain omission in her police statement (Ex. D. 1), but I find that most of these questions were misleading, since there are no such omissions, except that they are in different words. A careful reading of Ex. D. 1, shows that only minute details are omitted. Therefore, her statement cannot be discarded. ( 9 ) REWANDAS (P. W. 2), Panchkulabai (P. W. 3), Punaji (P. W. 4), Bhimrao (P. W. 5) and Yashodabai (P. W. 8) have corroborated Ramanbai substantially. Bhaudas (P. W. 9) is Sadhubhai of appellant Ghasiram. He did not support the prosecution fully. Even this witness stated that on receipt of message as to Shilats alleged serious condition, he accompanied Ramanbai to appellants house only to find that Shila was well, but the atmosphere of the house was loaded with heat of quarrels. Ashok told them that he does not wish to keep Shila in his house. Even this witness stated that on receipt of message as to Shilats alleged serious condition, he accompanied Ramanbai to appellants house only to find that Shila was well, but the atmosphere of the house was loaded with heat of quarrels. Ashok told them that he does not wish to keep Shila in his house. He also corroborates Ramanbai with regard to convening of Panchayat and that Ghasiram assured to see that Ashok and Shila patched up their differences and live in peace. ( 10 ) FROM the foregoing narration, it is apparent that Shila never got a congenial atmosphere in the appellants house. Ashok ill-treated her by refraining conjugal relationship, not touching the meals prepared by her, not taking bathe in the water fatched by her and persistent demands for radio, cycle and cash of Rs. 2,000/ -. Appellant Ghasiram instead of lending protective hands to her approved strained relations and ill-treatment to Shilabai. Ghasiram is shown to be a party to the dowry demands. Thus both the appellants are guilty of systematic ill-treatments to the deceased. ( 11 ) SECTION 113-A was inserted in Evidence Act by Criminal Law (Second amendment) Act No. 46 of 1983 and it came into force on 25-12-1983 from the date of receipt of the assent of the President. The Explanation to Section 113 reads For the purpose of this Section, the word Cruelty. has the same meaning as in Section 408-A, I. P. C. Section 408-A was also inserted in the Indian Penal Code by amendment which came into force with effect from 25-12-1983. It was, therefore, argued that the learned trial Court was in error to invoke the presumption under Section 113-A inasmuch as Shila committed suicide on 2-8-1983 much before it was inserted in the Evidence Act Reliance was placed on two Single Bench decisions in Criminal Appeal No. 1158 of 1984 (Narayan Rao v. State of M. P. 1, and Basant Kumar and two others v. State of MP. 2 where the learned single judge held that Section 113-A was not in force on the date of alleged incident and cruelty to a wife was also not punishable at the relevant time and, therefore, no presumption under Section 113-Aoftheevidenceactcould be raised. ( 12 ) WITH utmost respect to the learned Judges, I am unable to endorse the view taken by them. ( 12 ) WITH utmost respect to the learned Judges, I am unable to endorse the view taken by them. The law of evidence is a law of mere procedure and does not affect substantive rights and since alterations in the form of procedure are always retrospective, unless there is some good reason or other why they should not be, rules of evidence are retrospective in their operation. See.- Paras Ram and another v. Mt. Mewa Kunwar and others3. In Secretary v. Jankiramayya4, also it was held that rules of evidence come into force at once and must be followed by the Courts in deciding on the rights of the parties, whatever may have been the previous state of law in regard to the proper presumptions and burdens of proof. Similar view was taken in Ministerio Publico v. Filomeno5 and Data v. The State6. ( 13 ) IN K. Eapon Chako v. The Provident Investment Company (P) Ltd. 7, it was held that if the new Act affects matters of procedure only, prima facie it applies to all pending action as well as future. Evidence of presumption of condonation arising from marital intercourse has been held to be procedural and applicable to a pending divorce proceeding irrespective of the date of events to which the evidence might be directed. Blyth v. Blyth8. ( 14 ) IN Anant Gopal Shoorey v. The State of Bombay9, Section 342-A of Cr. P. C. , 1898 introduced by Amendment Act No. 26 of 1954 was held applicable to a prosecution pending at the time Amendment Act came into force. In Balumal Jamnadas Batra v. State of Maharashtra10, it was held that the enactment relating to burden of proof like Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962, is procedural. In Rai Bahadur Seth Shreeram Durgaprasad v. Director of Enforcement11, the Court held that amended Section 23 (1) of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act applies to contraventions which took place before the Amendment Act came into force. The Court followed Union of India v. Sukumar Pyne12, in which the earlier decision in Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh and another v. The State of Vindhya Pradesh13, was quoted with approval which held A person accused of the commission of an offence has no vested right to be tried by a particular court or particular procedure. The Court followed Union of India v. Sukumar Pyne12, in which the earlier decision in Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh and another v. The State of Vindhya Pradesh13, was quoted with approval which held A person accused of the commission of an offence has no vested right to be tried by a particular court or particular procedure. ( 15 ) ON the face of the aforesaid authoritative pronouncements, it must be held that Section 113-A of the Evidence Act is retrospective in operation and it applies to all pending actions irrespective of the fact that offence was committed earlier. It is also held that for the purpose of ascertaining meaning of the word Cruelty, Section 498-A, I. P. C. can be looked for deciding whether presumption is available or not in such cases. The aforesaid cases were not brought to the notice of both the learned single Judges. The single bench decisions relied on by the defence do not lay down a correct law since they run counter to the authoritative pronouncements of the Supreme Court. In such a case, it is not essential to refer the question to a larger Bench. ( 16 ) SHILABAI was married to Ashok Kumar, died within a period of seven years of her marriage. On question being raised whether she committed suicide a result of abatement, Section 113-A permits the Court to raise a presumption that husband and near other relations abated the commission of suicide. The cruelty inflicted on the deceased by the appellants is the same as provided in section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The presumption is rebuttable but the appellants led no evidence in rebuttal. The conviction of both the appellants under Section 306, I. P. C. must, therefore, be affirmed. ( 17 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant relied on Panchran and Samailal v. State of M. P. 14, Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra15 and Wazir Chand and another v. State of Haryana16, The first two cases were decided without Section 113-A of the Evidence Act. Wazir Chands case (supra) lays down that before a person can be convicted of abating suicide of any other person, it must be established that such other person committed suicide. In that case, the death was accidental and not by suicide. The facts of that case are distinguishable. Wazir Chands case (supra) lays down that before a person can be convicted of abating suicide of any other person, it must be established that such other person committed suicide. In that case, the death was accidental and not by suicide. The facts of that case are distinguishable. ( 18 ) IT was next argued that the sentence awarded to the appellants is excessive. The argument cannot be accepted. Of late crimes on woman in general and cruelty, abetment to commit suicide, dowry deaths in particular are on increase. The State of M. P. has the credit of being at the top in the list of the States where such crimes are on rise. A strict view has to be taken and deterrent sentence must be passed. Therefore, the sentences awarded to both the appellants call for no interference. ( 19 ) THE appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed. .