Judgment : 1. The appellant was the accused in S.C. No. 287 of 1991 on the file of the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Madras. He is found guilty for an offence under Section 498 (A) I.P.C. and he is sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months. The said conviction and sentence have been challenged in this Criminal Appeal. 2. The necessary facts for the purpose of disposal of this Criminal Appeal are as follows: The appellant Balaraman had married one Sivagami on 28. 1990. At the time of the marriage since the appellant was unemployed, he was not willing to marry and because of the pressure on the part of the parents of Sivagami, P.Ws. 2 and 3, the appellant married Sivagami. The parents had assured the appellant that even though he was unemployed, he will get employment after his marriage and he can look after his family. On that assurance the appellant married Sivagami and they were residing together. Even after marriage, he could not get any employment. Hence there was no happiness in the house of the appellant and the deceased. On 111. 1990 at about 2.30 P.M. when P.W.1 the brother of the accused had gone to the house, he found the dead body of Sivagami hanging inside the house of the appellant. He went and informed this matter to the police. P.Ws. 2 and 3, who are the parents of the deceased came to the place. Since death has taken place within a period of seven years from the date of marriage, the matter was entrusted to the Assistant Commissioner P.W.10 to hold an enquiry. The Assistant Commissioner held an enquiry and submitted a report that the girl Sivagami committed suicide due to poverty. However, the case was referred to the Police and a complaint was registered against the accused by P.W.1 1. Investigation was taken up, and P.W.13, after completing the investigation, submitted a charge sheet for offences punishable under Sections 304 (B) and 498 (A) I.P.C. 3. The Sessions Judge framed the charge against the accused under Section 304 (B) I.P.C. The accused pleaded not guilty. On behalf of the prosecution, 13 witnesses were examined as P.Ws. 1 to 13 and Exs. P.1 to P. 20 were got marked and M.Os. 1 and 2 were produced before the Court. On behalf of the defence no witness was examined nor any document was marked. On behalf of the prosecution, 13 witnesses were examined as P.Ws. 1 to 13 and Exs. P.1 to P. 20 were got marked and M.Os. 1 and 2 were produced before the Court. On behalf of the defence no witness was examined nor any document was marked. The plea of the accused was one of total denial. In addition he has stated that his wife committed suicide due to poverty. He has also admitted that he used to take jewels from his wife for the purpose of providing food, for the maintenance and also to settle the loan amount, which he has obtained during the time of marriage. 4. The Session Judge after conclusion of the trial, by judgment dated 24. 1992 acquitted the accused of the offence punishable under Section 304(B) I.P.C., but convicted him under Section 498 (A) I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for six months. 5. I heard learned Advocate Mr. N. Doraiswamy on behalf of the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the respondent-State. The learned Advocate Mr. N. Doraiswamy submitted before us that the Sessions Judge was not justified in convicting the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 498 (A) I.P.C. when there was no material before him to show that the appellant was ill-treating his wife. He has further submitted that P.Ws. 2 and 3, the parents of the deceased had not deposed that their daughter was being ill-treated by her husband. Under those circumstances, he has submitted before me that the Sessions Judge was not justified in convicting the appellant for the offence under section 498 (A) I.P.C. I heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor. He also very fairly submitted that there is no material to show that the appellant was ill-treating his wife during her life time. Under those circumstances, he has submitted before me that the Sessions Judge was not justified in convicting the appellant for the offence under section 498 (A) I.P.C. I heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor. He also very fairly submitted that there is no material to show that the appellant was ill-treating his wife during her life time. He submitted before me that she committed suicide due to poverty and that was the finding of the Sessions Judge and he has been acquitted under Section 304 (B) I.P.C. He has also pointed out that the accused had admitted in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that he had taken Mangala Sutram from his wife for the purpose of providing food for the family and also he has admitted that he used to take jewels from his wife for settling the loan and nowhere it is mentioned that there was cruelty on the part of the appellant towards his wife. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor very fairly submitted that the Session Judge was not justified in convicting the accused under Section 498(A) I.P.C. 6. They have taken me through the material evidence and the relevant document in the case. In the evidence nowhere it has been elicited that the accused was illtreating his wife during her life time. The prosecution has not produced any evidence to show that there was cruelty on the part of the appellant or his relatives towards the deceased. To convict a person under Section 498 (A) I.P.C., the prosecution must prove that the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman subjects such woman to cruelty. Further, there is no material to show that there was any wilful conduct on the part of the appellant, which was of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health of the woman. The clear finding of the Sessions Judge was that Sivagami committed suicide due to poverty. There is no evidence to show that any harassment was caused to the said Sivagami so as to commit suicide. When these materials are absent, the Sessions Judge was not justified in convicting the appellant for an offence under Section 498 (A) I.P.C. Accordingly, I set aside the conviction and sentences awarded against the accused/appellant and acquit him. There is no evidence to show that any harassment was caused to the said Sivagami so as to commit suicide. When these materials are absent, the Sessions Judge was not justified in convicting the appellant for an offence under Section 498 (A) I.P.C. Accordingly, I set aside the conviction and sentences awarded against the accused/appellant and acquit him. If he is on bail, his bail bond shall stand cancelled. The Sessions Judge while disposing of the case, has directed that M.O.2 Thali should be handed over to P.W.3, the father of the deceased girl Sivagami. The said order should be carried out since the learned Advocate Mr.N. Doraiswamy has been appointed by the Court to assist in this Criminal Appeal, he is entitled to get the fee from the Legal Aid Board.