J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred by A-1 against the judgment dated 19-12-2001 passed in S.C.No.53 of 1998 on the file of the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, whereby, the learned Additional Sessions while acquitting A-2 and A-3 convicted A-1 of the charges under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian. Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to, suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC, and further sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of (3) three years and also to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months, for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC; while ordering to run both the sentences concurrently. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: 3. The appellant is the husband of the deceased and A-2 and A-3 are the parents of the appellant. PW-1 is the mother of the deceased and the marriage between the deceased and A-1 was performed on 21.12.1988. A-1 does not belong to the caste of PW- 1, At the time of marriage, PW- 1 gave an amount of Rs.20,000/- by way of cash, 7 1/2 tulas of gold, 50 tulas of silver and one Luna Moped to the appellant towards dowry. At the time of marriage, the appellant was working as Warden in S.T.Hostel at Ravikamatham. Accused No.2 was working as Nursing Superintendent at T.B.Hospital, Visakhapatnam and Accused No.3 was working as Head Nurse in the same hospital. It is further alleged that all the accused used to harass the deceased for additional dowry from the date of the marriage. It is also alleged that the accused used to demand transfer of the house of PW- 1 in the name of the appellant or the deceased. As the said demand was not met, A-1 to A-3 did not allow the deceased to PW-1’s house. When PW-1 went to see her daughter, i.e., the deceased, A-2 and A-3 abused her and did not allow her to see the deceased. In the year 1990, one Surya Rao, who was examined as PW-5 went to the house of the accused for settling disputes, but in vain. When PW-1 went to see her daughter, i.e., the deceased, A-2 and A-3 abused her and did not allow her to see the deceased. In the year 1990, one Surya Rao, who was examined as PW-5 went to the house of the accused for settling disputes, but in vain. After 1990, the deceased and the appellant used to go to the house of PW-1, now and then. It is further stated by the prosecution that A-1 beat the deceased in the presence of PW-1. The deceased was blessed with second son on 6.8.1993 and Barasala of the said child was performed on, 4.11.1993. The appellant expressed his displeasure for not handing over gifts received at the time of Barasala. On 15.11.1993, at about 6 A.M., the tenant of PW-1 received a phone call from the third accused requesting PW-1 to come to Anakapalle. However, A-2 and A-3 went to PW-1’s house at Anakapalle and all of them went to the house of the accused and found the deceased dead on a cot. PW-1, later, was informed by the appellant that the deceased committed suicide. Thereafter, PW-1 lodged a complaint at Anakapalle P.S, in pursuance of which., the criminal law was set in motion and a case in Crime No.204 of 1993 was registered for the alleged offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC. The express F.I.R was marked as Ex. P-10 and the complaint is marked as Ex. P-1. The Sub Inspector of Police, who was examined as PW-10, took up investigation, visited scene of offence and collected the suicide note marked as Ex.P-9. Thereafter, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, who was examined as PW- 11, on information, visited the scene of offence and requested the Mandal Revenue Officer to conduct inquest over the dead body of the deceased and the Mandal Revenue Officer conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased and recorded the statements of PWs. 1 to 3 and others under Section 161 Cr.P.C. PW-12, the Deputy Tahasildar, Anakapalle, who was incharge M.R,O., Anakapalle, on requisition, visited the scene of offence and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased and the said inquest panchanama is marked as Ex.P-13. 1 to 3 and others under Section 161 Cr.P.C. PW-12, the Deputy Tahasildar, Anakapalle, who was incharge M.R,O., Anakapalle, on requisition, visited the scene of offence and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased and the said inquest panchanama is marked as Ex.P-13. Thereafter, on a requisition, the Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, Anakapalle who was examined as PW-8 conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased at about 4.30 P.M on 15.11.1993 and issued Post Mortem Certificate, Ex.P-6- According to the said doctor, the death is due to Asphyxia due to hanging. After completion of investigation, the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Anakapalli laid charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 304-B of IPC. 4. After appearance of the accused, the Court below framed charges under Sections 498-A and 306 of IPC, read over and explained to them in Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. In support of its case, the prosecution pressed in to service the evidence of PWs.1 to 12 and got exhibited Exs.P-1 to P-14. However, on the side of defence, DW-1 was examined and Exs.D-1 to D-18 were marked. 6. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, on appreciation of the entire evidence on record, while acquitting A-2 and A-3, however, found A-1 guilty of the charge under Sections 498-A and 306 of IPC and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as stated supra. Aggrieved thereby, A-1 has come up with the present criminal appeal. 7. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the impugned judgment as well as the other material on record. 8. The point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the prosecution has brought home the guilt of A-1 for the offences under Sections 498-A and 306 of IPC. 9. Though the prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses, PWs.1 to 8, the only witness, who spoke about the alleged harassment of the deceased, is PW-1 and unfortunately the said witness did not support the case of the prosecution and thus she was declared hostile. Thus, the evidence of the prosecution witnesses is in no way helpful to the prosecution to establish the guilt of A-1, i.e., the appellant herein for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A IPC or 306 IPC. 10. Thus, the evidence of the prosecution witnesses is in no way helpful to the prosecution to establish the guilt of A-1, i.e., the appellant herein for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A IPC or 306 IPC. 10. However, a crucial document, i.e., suicide note marked as Ex.P-9, is pressed into service. It is necessary to refer the said suicide note, which reads as thus: “DbnåIJlEå ÜRs iJønP ÌÍnåøRæëLjÁfnåI. «XIIëô «¢eæI buå«nXI øRë «RÔá úI«nXI ÜnåÜnåIô tablets buå[¨Iø¢bnåIÜRô«nXI. LjÁfnåI #JCuP ÜuåÜnåI xÜnåôV¢CEPøEP «RÜnåI #ÜRô«nXI. úI#bnåI¸ úIfnå \ÈIt àÓÈIt sÜRô«nXI. úI«nXI Sbnå_È Ínå[ÓÊønP ëæäZÁÈIt sJCR«nXI. #JfnåIønPë ÜuåÜnåI tablets }lR ^[¨Iø¢lRëøEP ÜR bnåIÜnå[¨I \[ÓAø¢bnålnåJLjÁfnåI. Dí Db­åI©ÜR ÜuåÜnåI D Ünå|nåÔÍnåbnåIIÜnå [ÓßCRtÜ¢ øþëô«¢eæøEP ÍnåJÔlEåë fnå_«nXJ Vuå[¨IsÜRôÜnåI. àÓ$ÐVuå[¨Isë #bnåI¸ ÔõÓbnåIøEP fnå_«nXJ #«XIIÜRÜnåI. àÓ$Ð Vuå[¨Isë }lR úI ÔõÓbnåIs ÜuåÜnåI Ü¢VnåIøþÜnåLjÁfnåI. ÜRs dÜnåô[ÓÊCEP ÜnåIJd ÜuåÜnåI ø¢«nXIsÜnåô áJlEå, ÌÈt, #ëô S «¢ebnå«nXs ÜRs ÜnådûÜnå QÅfnåbnåIIÂRÜuå ¯²ùÜnåí øRë LjÁëfnåæ bnåIÜnåzp¹Já. úI«nXI #ÜnåôÈIt «XII[ÓAlnåI ÜR ønPlnåI[ÓßL¢ àÓ«nXIÂnPIÍnåIÜnåô Ølnå±s úIs D [¨JÌÅfnåJ LjÁfnåI. #JfnåIøuP S[Óë Vuå[¨I`ÜRôÜnåI.” 11. The said suicide note clearly establishes that the deceased was committing suicide on account of frustration. But, even by a stretch of imagination, it cannot be said that the said suicide note was written solely or purely on account of the harassment meted out by her at the hands of the appellant. It is not uncommon in any family to have this sort of disputes, for which no one need to go to the extreme step of committing suicide. If really this sort of misunderstandings is the cause for taking the extreme step of committing suicide, no family life would be safe and it is impossible to live together. Admittedly, the deceased happens to be a sensitive woman, on account of which she committed suicide and as a result of which, a false case has been foisted against the appellant herein. In fact, the parameters of abetment have been described in Section 107 IPC, which reads as thus: 107. Abetment of a thing: - A person abets the doing of thing, who - First - 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 to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly: - Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. 12. 12. The explanation to the Section says that any willful misrepresentation or willful concealment of a material fact, which he is bound to disclose also come within the compass of abetment. 13. As already stated in the said suicide note marked as Ex-P-9, except stating that she is committing suicide as there is possibility of misunderstanding between herself and the appellant, nowhere it is stated that the appellant/ husband either instigated the deceased or committed any willful act or omission or intentionally aided her to commit suicide. As stated above, except the suicide note, there is absolutely no evidence to bring home the guilt of the appellant for the alleged offence punishable under Section 306 or 498-A IPC. 14. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence imposed by the Court below against the appellant-A1 for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC are set aside and the appellant is acquitted of the said charges. The appellant shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case. The fine amount, if any, paid shall be, refunded to the appellant. --X—