JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.3.99 whereby the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar, convicted and sentenced the appellant to 5 years R.l. and Rs. 500/- as fine U/s. 306 IPC and to 2 years R.l. and Rs. 300/- as fine under Section 498-A IPC in Sessions Case No. 91/98 State v. Ramesh . 2. The relevant facts are these : On July 16, 1998 at about 7.30 a.m. RW. 15 Girdhari Lal, Station House Officer (SHO) Police Station Kotwali Sikar received a telephonic message at the said police station that a woman had committed suicide at Santosh Sadan, Ward No. 16, Sikar. The SHO alongwith his staff and photographer reached the reported place and got the room of the house, wherein the woman had committed suicide, broken. Smt. Meena deceased (32) was noticed to have committed suicide by hanging herself with a rope tied in the ceiling fan. S/he was the wife of Ramesh appellant. Appellant's father RW. 6 Banwari Lal submitted a written report Ex.R 20 for the SHO regarding the unfortunate incident. In his report Banwari had stated that for the last two months his son, Ramesh appellant and his wife Smt. Meena deceased alongwith their two children, were living separately from the rest of the family in the northern portion of the house; that at about 7.00 a.m. when he was leaving for his school, the appellant informed him that the deceased had confined herself in the room and was not opening the door; that on this information he went to the said room; that on peeping through the windows he noticed the deceased hanging by a rope. Girdhari Lal SHO forwarded this report to the police station for registering a case under Section 174 Criminal Procedure Code FIR No. 33/98 under Section 174 Cr.RC. was registered and the SHO commenced enquiry into the causes of the death of the deceased. On July 17, 1998 RW. 7 Chuttan Lal, the father of Smt. Meena deceased, presented a report Ex.R 4 to the Superintendent Police, Sikar. was registered and the SHO commenced enquiry into the causes of the death of the deceased. On July 17, 1998 RW. 7 Chuttan Lal, the father of Smt. Meena deceased, presented a report Ex.R 4 to the Superintendent Police, Sikar. In his said report Chuttan Lal alleged that after her marriage with the appellant on 24.11.86 at Jaipur, the deceased passed a peaceful married life for 4-5 years only; that thereafter the appellant became a liquor addict and started treating Smt. Meena with physical cruelty; that on being fed up with appellant's violent behaviour his father got him transferred to Laxmangarh' (Sikar) but during his stay there even, the appellant continued to treat the deceased with cruelty; that about 5-6 years back the deceased alongwith his children came to reside with her father at Jaipur; that after giving her some training the informant got the deceased settled in a Beauty Parlour Shop which she ran for about two years; that about two years back the appellant and his father approached the informant and on their much insistence and assurance that the deceased would henceforth be treated properly and with dignity, sent her and her children with them; that again the appellant started physically assaulting the deceased and snatch away all her belongings and earnings also which she used to earn by working as a teacher in a private school; that on 15.7.98 at about 6.45 a.m. when the deceased was on her way to her school, Vidya Bharti, in a taxi, the appellant intercepted the vehicle, dragged the deceased out of the vehicle, beat her and let her go only after he had extorted Rs. 100/-from her; that on her return to the house in the evening the appellant again picked up quarrel with her whereupon the deceased confined herself in her room and ended her life by hanging herself to death.On the basis of the FIR lodged by RW. 7 Chuttan Lal Mathur Crime No. 335/98 under Section 498-A and 306 IPC was registered at the Police Station Kotwali, Sikar. After investigation of the case the police submitted a report for offences under Section 498-A and 306 IPC. The learned Sessions Judge, on trial of the appellant on the charges for the aforesaid offence, held him guilty of both the offences and convicted and sentenced him in the manner stated above. 3. Mr. After investigation of the case the police submitted a report for offences under Section 498-A and 306 IPC. The learned Sessions Judge, on trial of the appellant on the charges for the aforesaid offence, held him guilty of both the offences and convicted and sentenced him in the manner stated above. 3. Mr. A.K. Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant vehemently urged that the learned trial Judge did not appreciate the evidence on the record of the case in right perspective and erred on facts and in law in holding the appellant guilty of the offences under Section 498-A and 306 IPC. The learned counsel further submitted that the prosecution witnesses, who supported the prosecution case against the appellant, were highly interested witnesses and were unreliable and their testimony deserved to have been rejected by the trial court. It was further submitted by the learned counsel that occasional and unintended skirmishes and even exchange of hot words between a spouse are the normal features of married life and such a behaviour, if at ali, on the part of the appellant would not fall within the purview of the definition of the term 'abetment'. In support of his arguments the learned counsel relied upon the cases of Swamy Prahlad Das v. State of M.P & Anr. (1995 SCC (Cr.) 943 , Mahender Singh & Anr. v. State of M.P (1996 Cr.LJ 894) , Jainul Haque v. State of Bihar ( AIR 1974 SC 45 ) and Tangappamdian v. State through Dy. Superintendent of Police (1998 Cr.LJ 993) . After considering the arguments of Mr. Gupta in the light of the evidence brought by the prosecution on the record of the learned trial Judge in this case, I fail to agree with him. 4. A bare reading of Section 498-A informs that subjection of a woman by her husband or his relatives to cruelty attracts penal consequences Clause (a) of the Explanation thereunder defines 'cruelty' as any wilful conduct of the husband of the woman or the relative of the husband which is of such a nature as. is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman. The wilful conduct of the husband of the woman or his relative should not necessarily relate to use of criminal force or physical violence towards the woman. is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman. The wilful conduct of the husband of the woman or his relative should not necessarily relate to use of criminal force or physical violence towards the woman. If the wilful conduct of the husband or his relative is such as may reasonably cause mental torture to the woman as is likely to drive her to commit suicide or to cause grave injury to her life, limb or health, such conduct would also amount to 'cruelty' within the definition of the term defined in Clause (a) of the Explanation to Section 498-A IPC, irrespective of the fact whether the woman commits suicide or causes injury to her life, limb or health or not. 5. It may further be noted that if the wilful conduct of the husband of the woman or the relatives of the husband is of such degree or magnitude as has led the woman to commit suicide, such conduct may attract the offence of 'abatement' as defined in Clause 'First' of Section 107 IPC. Clause 'First' of Section 107 provides that 'a person abets' the doing of a thing who instigates any person to do that thing. Instigation may be active or passive. In other words it may be 'positive' as well as 'negative' An intentional act of instigating the other person to do a particular act would be active or positive act of instigating. But an act of a person which though not intentional, may be such as may likely instigate the other person to act or behave in a particular way. It would be the passive or negative form of instigation. This distinction is obvious when the wordings used in the language of clauses 'first' and 'thirdly' are taken due note of. In clause 'thirdly' the word 'aid' is preceded by the word 'intentionally'. In my opinion, therefore, the likely consequences of the subjection of a woman by her husband or the relative of her husband, contemplated in Section 498-A IPC should be understood in the above manner while considering the nature and effect of the consequences with reference to the offence of suicide punishable U/s. 306. 6. In my opinion, therefore, the likely consequences of the subjection of a woman by her husband or the relative of her husband, contemplated in Section 498-A IPC should be understood in the above manner while considering the nature and effect of the consequences with reference to the offence of suicide punishable U/s. 306. 6. In the instant case the allegations against the appellant were that after about 4 or 5 years of his marriage with the deceased the appellant became a liquor addict and under the influence of liquor he started assaulting the deceased physically. Such a conduct is alleged to have been exhibited by the appellant towards the deceased with such repeated frequency as ultimately led her to commit suicide. Question arises as to whether the prosecution had succeeded in proving these allegations against the conduct of the appellant by cogent, trustworthy and reliable evidence. 7. The prosecution examined 19 witnesses in all to prove their case against the appellant. Out of these 19 witnesses 11 witnesses were of fact, the remaining were of formal character. 8. Of the witnesses six were residents of Sikar, whereat the husband of the deceased and his relatives resided and the remaining five came from Jaipur whereat the parents of the deceased resided. In the appreciation of the testimony of all these witnesses their place of residence assumes some relevance in view of the conditions prevailing in our society and the behavioural pattern of the witnesses in the context of commission of such type of social offences particularly relating to woman. 9. RW. 1 Smt. Shanti Devi stated that after about 4 or 5 years the appellant had started consuming liquor and beating the deceased under its influence. She further stated that on having become fed up by the conduct and behaviour of the appellant, the deceased had to go to her parent's house at Ajmer. This witness claimed relationship with both sides. She is a resident of the same locality wherein the deceased used to live with the appellant and his relatives. There seems to be no good reason for her deposing falsehood. 10. RW. 2 Bajrang Lal has stated that while leaving for his office at 7, 8 A.M. on 15.7.98 he had seen the appellant, in drunken state, demanding money from the deceased and also beating her for that purpose. There seems to be no good reason for her deposing falsehood. 10. RW. 2 Bajrang Lal has stated that while leaving for his office at 7, 8 A.M. on 15.7.98 he had seen the appellant, in drunken state, demanding money from the deceased and also beating her for that purpose. This witness had admitted in cross examination that his house was 30-40 house away from Sastri Nagar, where the couple resided. This witness appears to be a chance witness and somewhat inimically disposed towards the appellant. His testimony does not inspire confidence in me and is accordingly rejected. 11. P.W. 3 Bhagwan Sahai has stated that about 7 or 8 years back the appellant started consuming liquor and beating the deceased whereupon Meena deceased alongwith her two children went to Jaipur and started living there with her father; that 2 or 2, 1/2 months prior to the death of the deceased there was some quarrel, between the appellant and the deceased and he (witness) had to pacify both. He added that after death of the deceased he had informed her father of that fact. This witness is a relation of the father of deceased. In his examination he admitted that the fact of his seeing the quarrel between the deceased and the appellant and his pacifying them and his further statement that he informed the father of the deceased on telephone of her death was not mentioned in his statement under section 161 Cr.RC. (Ex.D. 2). The testimony of this witness too cannot be believed for the above reason. 12. RW. 4 Mohan, a neighbour to the appellant, RW. 5 Bishambhar Dayal another neighbour and a witness to-the Punchayatnama, and RW. 6 Banwari Lal, a tenant in the house of the father of the deceased, turned hostile to the prosecution case and pleaded ignorance of the domestic condition and interse relationship between the deceased and the appellant. Their testimony, therefore, does not help either the prosecution or the appellant. 13. RW. 7 Chuttan Lal, P.W. 10 Smt. Sangeeta and PW 11 Parveen Kumar are the father, Bhabhi and brother respectively of the deceased. They have narrated the facts which have been mentioned above in sufficient detail and I need not repeat them once again. Their testimony, therefore, does not help either the prosecution or the appellant. 13. RW. 7 Chuttan Lal, P.W. 10 Smt. Sangeeta and PW 11 Parveen Kumar are the father, Bhabhi and brother respectively of the deceased. They have narrated the facts which have been mentioned above in sufficient detail and I need not repeat them once again. Suffice it to say that they have stated that after about 4 or 5 years of his marriage with the deceased the appeliant had started consuming liquor and under its influence he used to beat her; that on being fed up with the conduct and behaviour of the appellant the deceased came down to Jaipur where PW 7 Chuttan Lal arranged for a Beauty Parlour shop for her in order to enable her to earn livelihood for herself and her two children, but after about two years the appellant and his parents and other persons took her to Sikar on the assurance that she would be treated well but again the same story was repeated there ultimately leading her to commit suicide. All these witnesses are close relatives of the deceased and hence may be said to be interested. Therefore, before accepting their testimony against the appellant it seems advisable that independent corroboration thereof be sought. 14. RW. 8 Rais and RW. 9 Anwar are the two neighbours of P.W. 7 Chuttan Lal. They have fully corroborated the prosecution version and have stated that they themselves had seen the appellant several occasions beating the deceased under the influence of liquor. These two witnesses are no doubt the neighbours to P.W. 7 Chuttan Lal, the father of the deceased and thus may be said to be somewhat under his influence. But it may be noted that they belonged to a totally different community and lived quite independently and separately from Chuttan Lal in their adjoining and/or at some distance houses. It does not appeal to my reasons that they would enter the witness box to state falsehood on oath simply to oblige RW. 7 Chuttan. In my opinion, their testimony inspired confidence as they were truthful and reliable witnesses and the learned trial judge, after observing their demeanor in the witness box, has believed them. I see no good reasons to differ from the view and opinion of the learned trial judge regarding the worth and value of the testimony of these two witnesses. In my opinion, their testimony inspired confidence as they were truthful and reliable witnesses and the learned trial judge, after observing their demeanor in the witness box, has believed them. I see no good reasons to differ from the view and opinion of the learned trial judge regarding the worth and value of the testimony of these two witnesses. 15. RW. 14 Bhag Chand is a resident of Sikar and has stated that when the deceased had gone from the house of the appellant and started living with her father at Jaipur, he alongwith the appellant and his father had gone to take her back from there, that on being asked by P.W. 7 Chuttan Lal that they should give assurance that the deceased would no longer be treated with cruelty by the appellant, though the appellant and his father had given such assurance yet he had declined to fall in line with them. This witness has represented himself to be a common relative of both the parties. It is not uncommon in our society that common relative do intervene in and try to settle down the dispute relating to matrimonial relationship between the erring spouce. It was, therefore, not unusual for this common relative of the parties to have gone with the appellant and his father from Sikar to Jaipur in order to pursuade the deceased and her father RW. 7 Chuttan Lal to allow an opportunity to the appellant to improve over his conduct and behaviour towards the deceased. The very fact that on being required by P.W. 7 Chuttan Lal to give assurance that the appellant would not again treat the deceased with cruelty, gives ample colour of truthfulness to his testimony. In my opinion the testimony of his witness was quite trustworthy and inspiring confidence and the learned trial judge has rightly accepted that against the appellant. 16. To sum up the testimony of RW. 1 Smt. Shanti Devi, RW. 7 Chuttan Lal, RW. 8 Rais, RW. 9 Anwar, RW. 10 Smt. Sangeeta, RW. 11 Parveen Kumar and R W. 14 Bhag Chand was quite specific on the point that the conduct of the appellant towards the deceased was of such a nature as was likely to drive and did actually drive her to commit suicide. The requirement of such conduct being 'wilful' is not diluted by appellants' voluntary act of self intoxication. 11 Parveen Kumar and R W. 14 Bhag Chand was quite specific on the point that the conduct of the appellant towards the deceased was of such a nature as was likely to drive and did actually drive her to commit suicide. The requirement of such conduct being 'wilful' is not diluted by appellants' voluntary act of self intoxication. One who intentionally brings himself into the state of intoxication and does a criminal act under such state cannot take the benefit of his own wrong. In the instant case it was not the casual or occasional or accidental instance of intoxication and exhibition of violent behaviour by the appellant towards the deceased which may be pressed into service for taking his conduct from the category of 'wilful act' and which may be said of not being of such a nature as was not likely to drive the deceased to commit suicide or to cause grave injury to her life, limb or health. The addiction of the appellant to liquor and the repetition and frequency of exhibiting a violent conduct and behaviour by him towards the deceased, did clearly attract the requirement of 'wilful' and the required degree or magnitude of the nature of the act done by him towards the deceased, for constituting the offences punishable U/s. 498-A and 306 IPC in this case. The habit of intoxication of the appellant followed by violent conduct towards the deceased and the repetition of such act in a routine manner did constitute mental as well as physical cruelty to the deceased which ultimately led her to commit suicide. By his such conduct the appellant had certainly abetted in the commission of suicide by the deceased and, therefore, the conviction of the appellant on the charges under section 498-A and 306 IPC deserves to the upheld and maintained by this Court. This opinion is being recorded after having taken into account the facts of the cases relied upon by the appellant and the principle of law enunciated therein. The facts in the present cases are found quite distinguishable from those obtaining in the cited cases. Every case has to be decided on its own merits. On doing that, I am of the opinion that the cited cases do not help the appellant. 17. The facts in the present cases are found quite distinguishable from those obtaining in the cited cases. Every case has to be decided on its own merits. On doing that, I am of the opinion that the cited cases do not help the appellant. 17. To sum up, I hold that the prosecution had successfully proved the charges under section 498-A and 306 IPC against the appellant beyond doubt by cogent, trustworthy and reliable evidence. Therefore, he has rightly been held guilty of the above offences by the learned trial judge. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case the sentence imposed upon the appellant by the learned trial judge for his guilt calls for no interference by this Court. 18. In the result, the appeal of Ramesh appellant against the impugned judgment and order is dismissed.Appeal is dismissed. *******