JUDGMENT S.P. Khare, J. 1. Appellant Ravi @ Ravindra has been convicted under Section 306, Indian Penal Code for abetting the commission of suicide by his wife and he has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-. 2. Deceased Anju was married to accused Ravi on 16.5.1991 and she commit- ted suicide by burning herself on 12.1.1992. This incident took place in the house of her mother at Balaghat. The prosecution is that accused Ravi was demanding T.V. and fridge as dowry. He was also demanding an amount of Rs. 50,000/- for starting some business. The accused was subjecting his wife to cruelty. On 4.1.1992, deceased Anju and accused Ravi came to Balaghat. Deceased Anju was bitten by dog at Jabalpur. The accused left Anju in the house of her mother. He told that he was going to Bhopal. Instead of going to Bhopal he stayed in the house of Basant Kumar (PW 2). He is husband of Anju's elder sister. The accused sent Satish Kumar (PW 7) to bring the key from his wife. This key was of the lock of the house at Sihora where the accused was serving and living with his wife Anju. She did not send the key through Satish Kumar (PW 7). He came back. Anju came to the house of Basant Kumar (PW 2) and there was a quarrel between the two. The accused told Anju that she should prevail upon her mother to give him Rs. 50,000/-, failing which he would divorce her. At that time she was beaten by the accused. She was pregnant in those days. She came to the house of her mother Kesharbai (PW 1) and narrated the whole incident to her. She told about this incident to her sister Rekha (PW 3) who was in the house of her mother at that time. On the same day i.e. on 12.1.1992 Anju went in the bathroom of her house and sent herself ablaze. 3. The accused pleaded not guilty. The Trial Court after appreciation of the evidence on record held the accused guilty as mentioned above. 4. In this appeal it is argued that the evidence adduced by the prosecution does not establish that the appellant abetted the commission of suicide by his wife. 3. The accused pleaded not guilty. The Trial Court after appreciation of the evidence on record held the accused guilty as mentioned above. 4. In this appeal it is argued that the evidence adduced by the prosecution does not establish that the appellant abetted the commission of suicide by his wife. It is pointed out that the statements of the prosecution witnesses were recorded after two months of the incident and during this period the story of the prosecution was concocted. 5. The evidence on record has been carefully scrutinised by this Court. Kesharbai (PW1) is mother of deceased Anju. She has deposed that she had given an amount of Rs. 22,000/-, a golden ring and other articles worth Rs. 8,000/- at the time of Tilak of her daughter Anju with accused Ravi. Again at the time of marriage, she gave eight tolas gold, cooler, bed, dressing table, sofa-set, utensils and other articles. After eight days, Anju came back and told her that her husband was complaining that the dowry given to him was insufficient. She told her that the accused was demanding a T.V., gas oven and an amount of Rs. 50,000/- so that he may start some business. At that time the accused was clerk in Education Depart- ment. She has further deposed that in January, 1992 Anju came to her house at Balaghat with her husband. At that time she was very much disturbed and used to weep. She was pregnant at that time. The accused left her there and told her that he was going to Bhopal. He did not go to Bhopal and was found staying with Basant Kumar (PW 2) who is also her son-in-law. Satish Kumar (PW 7) came to her house and told her that accused Ravi has called the key of the house at Sihora from Anju. Anju did not give the key to him. She went with him to the house of Basant Kumar (PW 2). After sometime she came back with him. She told her that accused Ravi has beaten her and demanded an amount of Rs. 50,000/-. She also told that he has threatened to divorce her if this amount is not given to him. In cross-examination she has stated that the accused came to her house after the death of her daughter Anju but seeing her dead body heleft that place. 50,000/-. She also told that he has threatened to divorce her if this amount is not given to him. In cross-examination she has stated that the accused came to her house after the death of her daughter Anju but seeing her dead body heleft that place. In cross-examination she has stated that she had given her statement to the police on the date of the incident. She has further stated that Basant Kumar (PW 2) had not come in the marriage of Anju as he was also having differences with his wife. 6. Rekha (PW 3) has corroborated the testimony of her mother. She has also deposed that the accused had sent his friend Satish Kumar Dubey (PW 7) to bring the key from Anju. She refused to give the key and went to the house of Basant Kumar (PW 2) where her husband was staying. She came back at 12 noon and she was weeping. She told her that she has been beaten and abused by the accused. She also told that her husband is demanding an amount of Rs. 50,000/- and he has threatened to divorce her if he is not given this amount. 7. Basant Kumar (PW 2) has deposed that on hearing that Anju has died on account of burn injuries, he went to her house, Then he informed the police. The information given by him was recorded as Marg Intimation as per Ex. PI. He also stated that accused Ravi had sent his friend Satish Kumar Dubey (PW 7) to bring the key from his wife. He came back after some time and told the accused that Anju has not given the key. After half an hour Anju came there and retorted that her husband should come to her house if he wants the key. The accused Ravi refused to go with her. There was some quarrel between the accused and his wife. The accused sent Satish Kumar Dubey (PW 7) with his wife to leave her at her mother's house. This witness has been declared hostile. He has admitted that he was not on talking terms with Kesharbai (PW 1). He does not give any reason for this conduct. He has further stated that accused Ravi stayed in his house. It appears that this witness has some grievance against his mother-in-law as the accused has towards her. This witness has been declared hostile. He has admitted that he was not on talking terms with Kesharbai (PW 1). He does not give any reason for this conduct. He has further stated that accused Ravi stayed in his house. It appears that this witness has some grievance against his mother-in-law as the accused has towards her. It is found from his evidence that Kesharbai (PW 1) had sold her land for Rs. l,25,000/-and that was the reason that her two sons-in-law were demanding money from her. 8. Satish Kumar Dubey (PW 7) has stated that accused Ravi is his friend. He had gone to the house of Anju to bring the key. He was sent by the accused for bringing the key. He has further stated that Anju told him that she would not give the key to him and asked him to send the accused there. After sometime, she came to the house of Basant Kumar (PW 2) and asked the accused to accompany her to her mother's house. He refused to go there. This witness has also been declared hostile. 9. The evidence discussed above goes to show that the accused was behaving in an abnormal way with his wife. He was sending his friend to bring the key from his wife. He himself was not prepared to go to her house even after she came to the house of Basant Kumar (PW 2). This conduct of the accused shows that his behaviour towards his wife was not normal. The testimony of Kesharbai (PW 1) and Rekha (PW 3) goes to show that the accused was demanding an amount of Rs. 50,000/-for starting business and he had threatened to divorce deceased Anju if this amount was not given to him. Anju was shocked by the behaviour and conduct of the accused. She must have felt humiliated when her husband did not come with her from the house of Basant Kumar (PW 2). She was definitely abused and beaten by tine accused. She could not tolerate tine conduct of her husband and brought an end to her life on the same day. The words and conduct of the accused instigated his wife to commit suicide. This amounts to abetment Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana, AIR 1998 SC 958 =I (1998) DMC 165 (SC)=I (1998) CCR 265 (SC)=II (1998) SLT 525 (SC). . 10. The words and conduct of the accused instigated his wife to commit suicide. This amounts to abetment Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana, AIR 1998 SC 958 =I (1998) DMC 165 (SC)=I (1998) CCR 265 (SC)=II (1998) SLT 525 (SC). . 10. Argument of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the case of the prosecution could not be accepted as the statements of the witnesses were recorded after two months of the incident. In such cases, the procedure followed by the police is that an enquiry is conducted after registering the Marg. The statements of the witnesses are recorded in that enquiry. Thereafter, the crime is registered as has been done in the present case. The crime was registered on 11.3.1992 as per Ex. P3. Thereafter the case has been investigated. The statements of the witnesses are again recorded. The learned Counsel for the appellant has cited decision of the Supreme Court in Sharad v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1984 SC 1622 , where it has been observed that in such a case the witnesses have a tendency to exaggerate or add facts and therefore, the Court should examine their evidence with great care and caution. There is no dispute in the principles laid down in this case. The evidence in the present case has been examined with full care and caution. The testimony of the mother and sister of the prosecutrix is fully reliable. That is also corroborated by the evidence of Basant Kumar (PW 2) and Satish Kumar Dubey (PW 7). The immediate cause which drove Anju to commit a suicide was the conduct of her husband at the house of Basant Kumar (PW 2) on that day. He had repeated his demand of Rs. 50,000/- and also beaten her. He had abused and threatened to divorce her. It was intolerable for her. The accused, thus, abetted the commission of suicide by his wife. 11. The conviction of the appellant under Section 306, Indian Penal Code is well founded. It is confirmed. Sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years imposed by the Trial Court is, however, reduced to rigorous imprisonment for five years. With this modification in the sentence, the appeal is dismissed.