Honble SHARMA, J.–Instant appeal owes its origin in the judgment dated May 27, 1992 of the learned Special Judge, Sati Prevention and Additional Sessions Judge Jaipur City whereby the accused appellant (accused for short) was convicted and sentenced in sessions case No. 2/92 as under. ``Under Section 498A IPC to suffer one year RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- (in default to further suffer one month S.I.) Under Section 306 IPC - to suffer five years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- (in default to further suffer one month S.I.) Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. (2). Prosecution case in short is that Smt. Sheela Devi Jain had committed suicide by consuming insecticide poison on July 16, 1991 in the house of her husband (the accused) within a period of six years. An FIR was lodged with the Police Station Kotwali Jaipur by H.C. Shah, the brother of deceased Sheela on June 16, 1991 against the accused Lal Chand stating therein that shortly after the marriage the accused had started ill treating Sheela. She was not even fed and she used to have her food in the house of the informant. She was beaten a day before her death by the accused. The informant had suspicion that the accused killed Sheela by giving her poison. Initially case under sections 498A and 328 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. After completion of investigation charge sheet was laid and case was committed to the court of Sessions. (3). Learned trial court framed charges under sections 498A and 304B in the alternative 306 IPC. The accused denied charges and claimed trial. Prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. Statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. of the accused was recorded. The accused stated that he was not present in the house of the date of incident and had gone to Mahaveerji. The accused examined seven defence witnesses. Learned trial court after hearing the rival submissions convicted and sentenced the accused as indicated above. (4). As a first limb of his argument Mr. R.N. Khandelwal learned counsel appearing for the accused appellant that the accused had gone to Mahaveerji, when Sheela consumed poisonous matter and committed suicide. There is no evidence on record to establish that just prior to her death the accused gave any provocation which compelled Sheela to commit suicide. (5). Learned counsel Mr. R.N. Khandelwal learned counsel appearing for the accused appellant that the accused had gone to Mahaveerji, when Sheela consumed poisonous matter and committed suicide. There is no evidence on record to establish that just prior to her death the accused gave any provocation which compelled Sheela to commit suicide. (5). Learned counsel Mr. Khandelwal then added by contending that witnesses relied upon by the learned trial court are partisan witnesses highly interested in the deceased and they have deposed regarding their suspicion. These wit- nesses were contradicted with their police statements and thus on record there was evidence to indicate that they are unreliable. In the absence of independent corroboration the accused appellant could not have been convicted. (6). Next plank of Mr. Khandelwals contention is that the deceased was suffering from mental disease and she might have herself committed suicide without any provocation from the accused. Looking to her mental disease, the accused took precaution for not allowing her to prepare food because in the abnormal state of mind anything could have happened in the kitchen. Under these circumstances Sheela was allowed to take her food at the parents house. (7). At the end, on the totality of the conspectus of the evidence and circumstances of the case Mr. Khandelwal, learned counsel urged that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused and he was wrongly convicted. Reliance was placed on Manish Kumar Sharma vs. State of Raj. (1) and Bhanwar Lal vs. State of Rajasthan (2). (8). On the other hand, Mr. M.L. Goyal learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned judgment and contended that the treatment of accused with her wife Sheela was cruel. The accused provoked her to commit suicide and he was rightly convicted by the trial court. Reliance was placed on Smt. Shanti vs. State of Haryana (3). (9). I have reflected over the rival submissions and carefully perused the material on record. (10). A look at the statement of Dr. Shiv Gautam (DW 7) demonstrates that, deceased Sheela was suffering from mental disease Schizophrenia. After her marriage she was admitted in the hospital on July 5, 1986. Ex. D. 15 is the Admission Ticket of Sheela Jain. On the basis of information supplied by her mother Smt. padmawati symptoms of mental disease of Sheela Jain were incorporated in Ex. Shiv Gautam (DW 7) demonstrates that, deceased Sheela was suffering from mental disease Schizophrenia. After her marriage she was admitted in the hospital on July 5, 1986. Ex. D. 15 is the Admission Ticket of Sheela Jain. On the basis of information supplied by her mother Smt. padmawati symptoms of mental disease of Sheela Jain were incorporated in Ex. D 15 as under- (1) Lack of sleep (2) Go on spitting (3) Loss of appetite (4) Abuse to other persons (5) Fight with other persons (6) Beat other persons (7) Remains aloof (8) Talk to herself (9) Sometimes start singing songs or laughing or weeping (10)Laugh without any reason (11) Cut other persons clothes with scissor (12) Bite other persons (13) Does not bath (14) Does not take care of her own personal hygiene (15) Says that some body has done something to her. Present H/o Patient was alright 2 months back, then gradually she developed the above symptoms. Past H/o - She had first attack 4 yeas back for which she was admitted in Dr. B.K. Vyas Clinic for 3 months and was cured and discharged. Second attack 2 years back for which she took Rx from this Hospital and was cured. Third attack 1 year back for which she took treatment from this Hospital and was cured. Now this is her fourth attack and second admission. (11). Ex. D. 14 is the prescription ticket dated July 5, 1986 of Sheela Jain in the handwriting of Dr. Shiv Gautam. She was discharged on July 22, 1986. Ex. D. 7 is the discharge ticket bears signatures of Dr. Shiv Gautam. Testimony of Dr. Shiv Gautam could not be shattered in the cross-examination. (12). Prosecution witnesses Manoj Kumar (PW 3) Hem Chand Shah (PW 10) and Smt. Vinod Bala (PW 12) in their statements attempted to establish a case of dowry death but the learned trial court observed that charge under Section 304B IPC is not established. Statement of Smt. Padmavati (PW 7) remained in complete. She was not produced in the court and could not be cross-examined. Hem Chand Shah (PW 10) is the brother of the deceased Sheela and Smt. Vinod Bala (PW 12) is the wife of Hemchand. Both these witnesses denied that Sheela was ever suffered from mental disease or she was ever admitted to mental Hospital. She was not produced in the court and could not be cross-examined. Hem Chand Shah (PW 10) is the brother of the deceased Sheela and Smt. Vinod Bala (PW 12) is the wife of Hemchand. Both these witnesses denied that Sheela was ever suffered from mental disease or she was ever admitted to mental Hospital. Smt. Padmawati, the mother of deceased Sheela on the basis of whose information the symptoms of Sheela was recorded in the Admission Ticket Ex. D. 15 was withheld by the prosecution and she could not be cross examined. As the statement of Dr. Shiv Gautam is trustworthy and is supported by Admission ticket of Sheela (Ex. D. 15) and Prescription Ticket (Ex. D. 14), I hold that deceased Sheela was a patient of disease Schizophrenia and the prosecution witnesses Hem Chand Shah and Smt. Vinod Bala are unreliable. These witnesses deliberately concealed the fact of mental disease of deceased Sheela Jain from the court. (13). Deep study of `Psychiatric Journals reveals that in `Schizophrenia, there is a total or partial deterioration of personality with abnormalities of behaviour, thought or emotions. The Psychoses are a far more fruitful cause of criminal behaviour. The most common of these illness is depression. In depression there are delusions of poverty and sin and of guilt and worthlessness. Under the effect of these delusions a patient may commit suicide. (14). The prosecution did not examine any witness of neighbourhood to establish cruelty on the part of the accused. Though abrasions and bruises were found on the person of deceased Sheela at the time of post mortem but said injuries cannot be attributed to the accused in view of the fact that patient of schizophrenia has suicidal tendency. The prosecution witnesses Hem Chand Shah, Smt. Vinod Bala and Mr. Manoj Kumar are unreliable and untrustworthy and their statements were not properly scrutinized by the learned trial court. Concealing the fact of mental disease of Sheela, she was married to the accused who after coming to know the fact of her mental disease, admitted her to mental Hospital and did not allow her to cook food in the house. She was permitted to have her food in the house of her parents. There is no evidence on record to show that the accused treated the deceased with cruelty and provoked her to commit suicide. The defence version appears to be quite reasonable. She was permitted to have her food in the house of her parents. There is no evidence on record to show that the accused treated the deceased with cruelty and provoked her to commit suicide. The defence version appears to be quite reasonable. Accused Lal Chand gave a detailed statement showing his innocence. Testimony of defence witnesses Paras Lal (DW 1) Tara Chand (DW 2) Lal Chand (DW 3) Raj Kumar Jain (DW 4) Shabbir Ahemed (DW 5) Suresh Chand Jain (DW 6) and Dr. Shiv Gautam (DW 7) supports the innocence of the accused. (15). Resultantly, the appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed. The impugned judgment of the trial court is set aside and the accused appellant Lal Chand shall stand acquitted from charge under section 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. He is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged. Record of the case be sent back forthwith.