Judgment Nawab Singh, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated February 9th, 2001 and order of sentence dated February 13th, 2001 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, whereby, the appellant was convicted for the offences under Sections 306 and 498A, IPC and sentenced as under: Offence u/s Sentence Fine In default 306, IPC, RI for 5 years 5000 RI for 1 year 498-A, IPC RI for 2 years 3000 RI for 3 months Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2 Arun Sharma accused-appellant married Ritu (deceased) in the year 1995. On June 27th, 1999 she consumed some poisonous substance. She was brought to Civil Hospital, Sonepat by her husband vide information (Exhibit PG), Police was informed. Ram Chander, Station House Officer, Police Station Sadar, Sonepat (PW9) reached the hospital and found Ritu unfit to make statement. Ritu died on the same day at 8 p.m. The Medical Officer sent information (Mark A) to the police. Next day June 28th,1999 Ram Chander Investigator again went to Civil Hospital and recorded statement (Exhibit PB1) of Dal Chand (PW4) father of the deceased. Dal Chand stated that Arun Sharma and Ritu were married four and a half years prior to the occurrence. He had given sufficient dowry in accordance with his status but accused/appellant and his mother were not satisfied with the dowry. His daughter always would complain that she was subjected to harassment by accused/ appellant and his mother for not bringing sufficient dowry. At one point of time, a demand of Rs.50.000 was made but he showed his inability to pay the amount. 10 days prior to the occurrence, Ritu was turned out by the accused from her matrimonial home. However, after consoling his daughter, he took and ieft her at her matrimonial home. On the eventful day June 27th, 1999 Krishana (PW5) mother of the deceased went to the house of the accused and met his daughter. When she came back to her house, she was informed on telephone that Ritu had consumed some poisonous substance. The sum and substance of the statement of Dai Chand was that his daughter committed suicide because she was subjected to cruelty by the accused in connection with demand for dowry. First Information Report (Exhibit PB) was recorded. Inquest report (Exhibit PE) was prepared. Post-mortem examination on the dead body of deceased was conducted by Dr. The sum and substance of the statement of Dai Chand was that his daughter committed suicide because she was subjected to cruelty by the accused in connection with demand for dowry. First Information Report (Exhibit PB) was recorded. Inquest report (Exhibit PE) was prepared. Post-mortem examination on the dead body of deceased was conducted by Dr. A.S. Ahlawat (PW8). He opined that Ritu died on account of consuming aluminium phosphate. 3. At the trial, charge was framed against the accused/appellant and his mother Indra Devi under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. The main witnesses examined by the prosecution were Dal Chand (PW4), Smt. Krishana (PW5), father and mother of the deceased, Dr. A.S. Ahlawat (PW8) who conducted the post-mortem examination and Ram Chander Investigator (PW9). 5. The accused were examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to explain the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence. They denied their complicity and pleaded innocence. The appellant stated that Ritu died of poison because she consumed some poisonous substance taking the same to be medicine. She was never subjected to harassment for the demand for dowry. 6. In defence, he examined four witnesses viz. Rameshwar Dass (DW1), Rajinder Kumar (DW2), Ashok Kumar (DW3) and Prahalad (DW4). 7. By impugned judgment dated February 9th, 2001 learned Trial Judge acquitted the accused/appellant for the offence under Section 304B, IPC but convicted him under Sections 498A and 306, IPC, as spelt out in paragraph No. 1 of this judgment and acquitted Indra Devi. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant has urged that prosecution failed to prove that Ritus death was dowry death and it was also accepted by the learned Trial Judge that it was not a dowry death and that is why the accused was acquitted for the offence under Section 304B, IPC. Since it was not dowry death so, the learned Trial Judge fell in error in convicting and sentencing the accused for the offence under Sections 306 and 498A, IPC. There is no evidence on record to show that Ritu committed suicide because of being subjected to cruelty by the accused. 9. The accused/appellant was charged under Section 304B, IPC, but was acquitted because the evidence led by the prosecution failed to prove that the death of Ritu occurred in connection with demand for dowry. There is no evidence on record to show that Ritu committed suicide because of being subjected to cruelty by the accused. 9. The accused/appellant was charged under Section 304B, IPC, but was acquitted because the evidence led by the prosecution failed to prove that the death of Ritu occurred in connection with demand for dowry. No appeal by the State qua the acquittal of accused under Section 304B, IPC, has been preferred. In view of this, the sole question to be decided in this appeal is whether the accused/appellant abetted the suicide which could bring his act under the mischief of Section 306, IPC. Incidentally the accused/appellant and the parents of the deceased were residing in the same town Sonepat. Dal Chand (PW4) and Krishana (PW5) are the witnesses relied upon by the prosecution to prove that deceased was subjected to cruelty by the accused. Both of them have categorically stated that the accused/appellant harassed the deceased after the marriage because the demand of Rs.50,000 raised by the accused could not be met. On a number of occasions, they went to the house of accused/appellant to plead that the deceased should not be iil-treated. Even on the day of occurence, Krishana went to the house of the accused/appeliant to resolve the misunderstanding between the couple. It was also stated by Krishana (PW5) that there was so much of hatred against the deceased that her mother-in-law refused to take meals cooked by the deceased. Deceased was turned out by the accused-appellant from his house after giving her beatings. 10. In Krishan Kumar and Others v. State of Haryana the wife of accused/appellant committed suicide by consuming organo-phosphorus pesticide after about 2 years of the marriage. Honble Mr. Justice K.S. Garewal speaking for the Bench observed that husband had grabbed his child from her mother deceased and he filed divorce petition 4-5 months before the occurrence and also four days prior to the occurrence, husband again expressed that wife-deceased should leave his house but only after signing the divorce papers were sufficient circumstances in which deceased was driven to commit suicide and conviction of the husband was converted from Section 304B, IPC, to one under Section 306, IPC, and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for five years. 11. 11. When it comes to abetting the act of suicide by the husband of the deceased wife, considerations would be at a different footing, than the considerations involved in an ordinary case. The words "instigates" or "aids" used in Section 107, IPC would be of wider and deeper amplitude. Cruel and unscrupulous husbands actuated by mens rea create circumstances which force the hapless wives to put an end to their lives by committing suicide. Such husbands heap cruelty on the wives to somehow get rid of them. Creation of such circumstances by the husband as are sufficient to drive the wife to take the extreme step of committing suicides would essentially be act of instigating and aiding the act of suicide. The Courts of law cannot remain insensitive to the miseries of such unfortunate wives nor can be silent spectators. 12. Section 113A of the Evidence Act has been enacted specifically to deal with the situation. If the husband or his relatives subjected the deceased to cruelty and she committed suicide, it can be presumed that her suicide was abetted and there could not be any other reason for the deceased to commit suicide except that she was subjected to cruelty as defined under Section 498A, IPC and driven to end her life by suicide. 13. It has already been detailed in paragraph No.9 above, as to how the deceased was subjected to cruelty, mental as well as physical, by her husband- the appellant. The evidence is cogent enough and inspires all the confidence. 14. It thus stood proved that the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the appellant, life was made miserable for her, she was put in such a plight that she was driven to commit suicide. The circumstances compel the invocation of the presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act. 15. It is gratifying to note that the Trial Judge appreciated the evidence and circumstances in the correct perspective and reached the correct decision. The judgment of conviction and the order of sentence do not suffer from any flaw and are upheld. The appeal is dismissed. 16. The appellant was released on bail by this Court during the pendency of the appeal. His bail/surety bonds are cancelled. He be arrested and sent to jail to undergo the remaining part of sentence. The judgment of conviction and the order of sentence do not suffer from any flaw and are upheld. The appeal is dismissed. 16. The appellant was released on bail by this Court during the pendency of the appeal. His bail/surety bonds are cancelled. He be arrested and sent to jail to undergo the remaining part of sentence. Learned Trial Judge is directed to comply with this order forthwith under intimation to this Court.