JUDGMENT 1. - The above-named accused appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 24.11.1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore in Sessions Case No. 15/99 by which he convicted the accused appellant in the following manner: Name of accused Conviction under Section Sentence awarded Jagdish 306 IPC. Seven years Rl and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 3 months Rl. 498-A I.P.C. One years Rl and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month Rl. Both Sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Note:-By the same judgment, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused appellant of the charge under Section 304-B IPC. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, in short, are as follows:- On 9.5.1999 at about 12.10 PM, PW 1 Shiv Karan, by caste Harijan lodged a report Ex. P/1 to PW 8 Laburam, SHO, Police Station Ahore, District Jalore stating that his daughter Madhu (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) was married to accused appellant in the month of February, 1997. Since after the marriage, his son-in-law i.e. accused appellant used to treat the deceased with cruelty and used to beat her and also used to demand dowry. It is further stated in the report that whenever deceased used to come to his house, she used to tell all the mal- treatments done by accused appellant on her, but she was consoled by saying that everything would be set right. It is further stated that whenever accused appellant used to come to his house, he used to take liquor and thereafter, he used to beat deceased and used to demand money and other items. Before this incident, near about 10-15 days back, deceased came to his house, but on 7.5.1999, a day before the fateful incident, accused appellant came to his house and in his absence took the deceased to his house at Ahore. On 8.5.1999 information was received that deceased had died and upon this, he and other members of his family went to Ahore and they were of the view that deceased had been killed by accused appellant and his mother, as they used to torture her and make demand for dowry etc. and for non-compliance of dowry demand, they used to threaten that they would kill the deceased. and for non-compliance of dowry demand, they used to threaten that they would kill the deceased. On this report, police registered the case and started investigation. During investigation, the post mortem of the dead body of the deceased was got conducted by PW 7 Dr. Ghanshyam Tripathi and the post mortem report of the deceased is Ex. P/6. The cause of death of deceased opined in Ex. P/6 reads as under:- "In our opinion, the cause of death of Smt. Madhu is due to (sic) Asphyxia, caused by hanging." During investigation, the accused appellant was arrested on 18.5.1999 through fard Ex. P/2. Before the report Ex. P/1, the father of the accused appellant also lodged a report Ex. P/7 before PW. 8 Laburam on 8.5.1999 stating that on 7.5.1999 accused appellant took the deceased from the house of his father-in-law and at about 1.30 on 8.5.1999 accused appellant put his daughter of eight months with him and, thereafter, at about 2.00 PM deceased committed suicide. On this report, police registered marg FIR No. 11/99 under Section 176 Cr.P.C. and investigation was started by SDM PW 9 Ramdayal Meena. After usual investigation, the police submitted challan against the accused appellant for committing offence under Secs. 304-B and 498-A IPC. in the Court of Magistrate and, thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. On 16.8.1999, the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore framed charges under Secs. 498-A, 304-B and in the alternative Section 306 IPC were framed against the accused appellant. The charges were read over and explained to the accused appellant, who pleaded not guiity and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and several documents were got exhibited. Thereafter, statement of accused appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. No evidence in defence was produced by the accused appellant. The learned Sessions Judge, Jalore vide his judgment and order dated 24.11.1999 acquitted the accused appellant of the charge under Section 304-B IPC but convicted him under Secs. 498-A and 306 IPC and sentenced in the manner stated above, holding inter-alia:- 1. That deceased committed suicide. 2. That he also drew the presumption under section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act against accused appellant. 3. 498-A and 306 IPC and sentenced in the manner stated above, holding inter-alia:- 1. That deceased committed suicide. 2. That he also drew the presumption under section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act against accused appellant. 3. That no case under section 304-B IPC was made out against the accused appellant, but case of abetment and mal-treatment has been proved and thus, accused appellant was convicted under Ss. 498-A and 306 IPC. Aggrieved from the said judgment and order dated 24.11.1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore, the present appeal has been filed by the accused appellant. 3. In this appeal, the learned counsel for the accused appellant has made the following submissions:- 1. That in the present case, incident took place on 8.5.1999 and report was lodged on 9.5.1999 and therefore, there is a delay in lodging the report. Thus, prosecution case should not be held proved. 2. That the learned Sessions Judge has wrongly placed reliance on Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act. 3. That no case of abetment is made out in the present case. Hence, it has been argued that the accused appellant be acquitted of the charges framed against him. 4. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the accused appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record of the case. 6. Before proceeding further, I would like to discuss first the medical evidence in the present case. 7. in this, respect, the statement of PW 7 Dr. Ghanshyam Tripathi may be referred to. He states in his statement that on 9.5.1999 alongwith two other doctors he conducted the examination of the dead body of the deceased and after examination, it was opined that the cause of death of the deceased was due to asphyxia, caused by hanging. He has proved the post mortem report Ex. P/6. 8. PW 9 Ramdayal Meena. SDM during the course of investigation in marg FIR No. 11/99 has also produced Ex. P/14 pertaining to cause of death of deceased and in that Ex. P/14, it has been mentioned that cause of death of deceased was due to Asphyxia caused by hanging. 9. He has proved the post mortem report Ex. P/6. 8. PW 9 Ramdayal Meena. SDM during the course of investigation in marg FIR No. 11/99 has also produced Ex. P/14 pertaining to cause of death of deceased and in that Ex. P/14, it has been mentioned that cause of death of deceased was due to Asphyxia caused by hanging. 9. Thus, from the medical evidence, it appears that death of the deceased was not natural, but it was unnatural in the shape of suicide. 10. It may be stated that there is no dispute on the point that deceased committed suicide within seven years of her marriage. 11. To prove the charge of the offence under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution has to prove the following two facts:- 1. The commission of suicide by a person. 2. The accused abetted the commission thereof. 12. In the present case, so far as the first point is concerned, there is no dispute that deceased committed suicide and thus, this fact should be held as proved. 13. Now the most important question in the present case is whether by his act and deeds, accused appellant has made that situation which resulted in the commission of suicide by deceased (his wife) or not. 14. What is abetment, it has been defined in Section 107 IPC, which reads as under "107. Abetment of a thing. - A person abets the doing of a thing, who Firstly-Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly-Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order of the doing of that thing; or Thirdly-Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing." 15. The intention to aid the commission of the crime, is the gist of the offence of abetment by aid. In case of demand of dowry or ill-treatment and beating, the case would be covered in first category i.e. instigating any person 1 to do that thing. 16. In order to constitute abetment, the abettor must be shown to have intentionally aided the commission of the crime, Mere proof that the crime charged could not have been committed without the interposition of the alleged 5 abettor, is not enough compliance with the requirements of Section 107 IPC. 17. 16. In order to constitute abetment, the abettor must be shown to have intentionally aided the commission of the crime, Mere proof that the crime charged could not have been committed without the interposition of the alleged 5 abettor, is not enough compliance with the requirements of Section 107 IPC. 17. On plain reading of Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act, it is obvious that if a wife is shown to have committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of marriage and there is evidence that she was subjected to cruelty by her husband or his relatives, it would be permissible for 1 the Court to presume that such suicide was abetted by her husband or by such relatives of her husband. 18. Before discussing the evidence in the present case and the findings of the learned Sessions Judge, something should be said about suicide, especially keeping in mind that normally one would not commit suicide unless 1 there are strong and compelling reasons for it. Thus, ordinarily there has to be a very pressing motive behind every case of suicide. That is why emphasis should be made (sic) as to why a persons commits suicide and in this case it has also to be probed why deceased has committed suicide. 19. The constant fact of wailing and weeping is one of the important symptoms of an intention to commit suicide as mentioned by George W. Brown and Tirril Harris in their book "Social Origins of Depression." 20. Suicide is intentionally taking of ones life. In other words, suicide is the initiation of an act leading to ones own death. Conventional wisdom decrees that suicide is the escape route for the abnormal. A person who commits suicide; can : adopt different methods for committing suicide; for example, use of fire arms, poisoning specially by drugs over drugging, hanging, inhalation of gas etc. etc. 21. Honble Supreme Court took the occasion to deal with the point in question in Shard Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, ( AIR 1984 SC 1622 ) and in that case quoted some passages of an eminent psychiatrist : Robert J. Kastenbaum from his book "Death, Society and Human Experience"; Honble Supreme Court enumerated the causes of suicide in the following manner in that judgment:- 1. The fact is that some people who commit suicide can be classified as psychotic or severely disturbed. 2. If we are concerned with the probability of suicide in very large populations, then mental and emotional disorder is a relevant variable to consider. 3. And it is through a gross distortion of the actual circumstances that one could claim all suicides are enacted in a spell of madness. 4. Seen in these terms, suicide is simply one of ways in which s relatively weak member of society loses out in the jungle-like struggle. 5. The individual does not destroy himself in hope of thereby achieving a noble post mortem reputation or a place among the eternally blessed. Instead he wishes to substract himself from a life whose quality seems a worse evil than death. 6. The newly awakened spirit of hope and progress soon shadowed by a sense of disappointment and resignation that, it sometimes seemed, only death could swallow. 7. Revenge fantasies and their association with suicide are well know to people who give ear to those in emotional distress. 8. People who attempt suicide for reasons other than revenge may also on the assumption that, in a sense, they will survive the death to benefit by its effect. 22. Psychologists have viewed suicide as a means of handling aggressive impulses engendered by frustration. The Honble Supreme Court again dealt with this aspect in P. Rathinam v. Union of India, (AIR 1994 SC 144) and there enumerated the causes responsible for committing suicide in the following manner:- "Various social forces like the economy, religion and socio-economic status are responsible for suicides. There are various theories of suicide, to wit. sociological, psychological, bio-chemical, and environmental." "The causes of suicides are many and varying in as much as some owe their origin to sentiments or exasperation, frustration and revolution, some are the result of feeling of burden, torture and sadness. Some are caused by loss of employment, reverse of fortune, misery due to illness, family trouble and thwarted love. Sometimes killing is in opposition to society and sometimes in opposition to particular persons. This happens when the person committing suicide nurses a feeling of unjust treatment, maltreatment and cruelty." 23. The word suicide has two facets in Indian Penal Code. Some are caused by loss of employment, reverse of fortune, misery due to illness, family trouble and thwarted love. Sometimes killing is in opposition to society and sometimes in opposition to particular persons. This happens when the person committing suicide nurses a feeling of unjust treatment, maltreatment and cruelty." 23. The word suicide has two facets in Indian Penal Code. One is an attempt to commit suicide which is punishable under Section 309 IPC and the second is abetment of suicide which is punishable under Section 306 IPC. 24. As to what would constitute instigation for the commission of an offence would depend upon the facts of each case. Therefore, in order to decide whether a persons has abetted by instigation the commission of an offence or not, the act of abetment has to be judged in the conspectus of the entire evidence in the case. 25. Keeping the above principles in mind, the facts of the present case are being examined. 26. In report Ex. P/1, which was lodged by PW 1 Shiv Karan, father of the deceased on the next day of incident, it has been clearly stated that accused appellant used to treat the deceased with cruelty and used to beat her and it has also been mentioned in that report that accused appellant used to beat deceased after taking liquor. The fact of beating, mal-treatment, taking liquor and also to some extent demand of dowry though not held to have been proved by the learned Sessions Judge, is found in the statements of PW 1 Shiv Karan, father of the deceased, PW 2 Sushila, mother of the deceased, PW 3 Ramswaroop, uncle of the deceased, PW 5 Satish Kumar, brother of the deceased and PW 11 Sohanlai, mama of the deceased. There is also evidence in the present case that before 8.5.1999 the day on which deceased committed suicide, accused appellant went to the house of his father-in-law and took the deceased to his house and deceased committed suicide on 8.5.1999, it further appears that on that day, accused appellant was also there and deceased was having a child of about eight months and accused appellant went inside the room after handing over his daughter to his father and thereafter, at about 2.00 PM, deceased committed suicide. Therefore, all these facts go to show that at the time when deceased committed suicide, accused appellant was very much there in the house and after leaving his daughter with his father, he went inside the room, where deceased committed suicide. It means accused appellant must have made such situation inside the room which compelled deceased to commit suicide. 27. Apart from the evidence of PW 1 Shiv Karan, PW 2 Sushila, PW 3 Ramswaroop, PW 5 Satish Kumar and PW 11 Sohan Lal just discussed above, in this case, there is one independent witness, namely, PW 4 Chandrakanta. She is the neighbour of deceased and she clearly states in her statement that accused appellant used to beat deceased after taking liquor and her mother-in-law also torture her for want of dowry etc. She has further narrated one incident where accused appellant first pulled hair of the deceased and beat her. 28. In my opinion, this witness is a very important witness being an independent witness and fully corroborates the statements of other witnesses, and from their statements, the following facts stand proved:- 1. That on the date of fateful incident, deceased was in the house of her in-laws. 2. That there is ample and sufficient evidence that deceased had complained that she was beaten by her husband accused appellant and accused appellant used to take liquor and after taking liquor, he used to beat her. 3. That accused appellant was also present when deceased 20 committed suicide. 4. That deceased was having a child of eight months. 5. That deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment by accused appellant. 29. In my opinion, the aforesaid facts, which have been established by cogent and reliable evidence, are grave and may lead to serious provocation, enough for an ordinary woman in the Indian setup, to do what the deceased is alleged to have done in the present case. There is also no evidence in the present case that any attempt to save the deceased from committing suicide had been made by the accused appellant or his relatives or an attempt to prevent that act had been made by accused appellant or other members of his family. 30. There is also no evidence in the present case that any attempt to save the deceased from committing suicide had been made by the accused appellant or his relatives or an attempt to prevent that act had been made by accused appellant or other members of his family. 30. Thus, the above well established facts and evidence of attitude of the accused appellant in not taking prompt steps to prevent the commission of crime establish the fact that accused appellant in the present case had abetted the commission of offence of suicide by his wife (deceased). 31. Thus, if the learned Sessions Judge has drawn the presumption under Section 113 A of the Indian Evidence Act, he has committed no illegality in doing so and the accused appellant, has not been able to rebut that presumption and he has rightly come to the conclusion that suicide committed by deceased in the present case was abetted by accused appellant. In other words, it can be said that accused appellant by his conduct had created the situation which he knew that his wife would commit suicide and deceased in-fact had done so, therefore, the case would squarely fall within the ambit of Section 306 IPC. In such a case, the conduct of the person would tantamount to inciting or provoking or virtually pushing the woman into a desperate situation of no return which would compel her to put an end to her miseries by committing suicide. Such type of conduct is present in the attitude of the accused appellant in the present case. 32. The fact that deceased was having a child and, thereafter, she committed suicide would itself go to show that there must be such strong compelling reasons which led her to commit suicide. 33. It may further be stated here that in normal way, nobody would commit suicide, therefore, there must be compelling reasons for deceased to commit suicide and for that being the wife of accused appellant Jagdish, accused appellant Jagdish should be held responsible for making such an atmosphere resulting in committing suicide by deceased. The prosecution has thus proved that accused appellant had abetted the commission of offence of suicide by his wife (deceased) on the fateful day i.e. 8.5.1999. 34. Thus, for the reasons stated above, the findings of the learned Sessions Judge convicting the accused appellant for the offence under Secs. The prosecution has thus proved that accused appellant had abetted the commission of offence of suicide by his wife (deceased) on the fateful day i.e. 8.5.1999. 34. Thus, for the reasons stated above, the findings of the learned Sessions Judge convicting the accused appellant for the offence under Secs. 498A and 306 IPC are liable to be confirmed.Delay in lodging report 35. On this point, the case of the learned counsel for the accused appellants is that in the present case, the incident took place on 8.5.1999 and report has been lodged on 9.5.1999 and thus, there is a delay of 24 hours and it should be treated as fatal one. 36. In my opinion, this argument is frivolous one. The newly wedded wife committed a suicide and in these circumstances, if there is a delay of some hours or a day, I think it should not be treated as fatal. For that, two authorities of the Honble Supreme Court in the following case may be seen:- 1. Gurbachan Singh v. Satpal Singh, ( AIR 1990 SC 209 ) 2. State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaisal, ( AIR 1994 SC 1418 ) 37. Thus, the argument that since there is delay of one day in lodging report, the prosecution case should be thrown out on this ground alone, stands rejected.The result of the above discussion is that this appeal filed by the deceased appellant Jagdish fails and is dismissed, after confirming the judgment and order dated 24.11.1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore.Appeal dismissed. *******