Jitendra Chauhan, J. 1. Convict Harbans Singh has preferred this appeal against judgment/order dated 21.04.2014, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala ('trial Court', for brevity), vide which he has been convicted for the commission of offence punishable under Section 306 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, (for short, 'the Indian Penal Code') and sentenced as under:- Offence Sentence Awarded Amount Fine Imposed In default of Payment of fine U/s 306 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for five years Rs. 5,000/- To undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year U/s 498-A IPC Rigorous imprisonment for five years Rs. 1,000/- To undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three month However, Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. In brief, the facts of the case, which find mention in para No. 2 of the impugned judgment, are reproduced as under:- "2. The brief resume of the prosecution story is that the present case was registered on the statement made by complaint Charanjit Singh to the police, wherein he alleged that he is resident of village Dhanetha, P.S. Sadar, Samana and is running the shop of Photography in the village. He is having four sisters. The marriage of his younger sister Amarjit Kaur was performed with accused Harbans Singh, 14 years ago, according to Sikh rites. They gave dowry as per their capacity at the time of marriage but the in-law of his sister were not satisfied with the same. Accused Harbans Singh used to taunt his sister Amarjit Kaur for bringing less dowry and he also used to beat her. An application was given to the Women Cell, Sangrur by them and the matter was compromised. After some time, his sister Amarjit Kaur was again beaten by her husband. His sister Amarjit Kaur was blessed with two daughters but no son and due to this reason, her husband i.e. the present accused used to taunt her regularly. He has further alleged that due to the above said harassment and taunting made by the accused, Amarjit Kaur Committed suicide by jumping into the canal. After registration the case, the accused was arrested and on completion of all formalities of investigation, present challan against the accused was presented in the Court" 2. Charges under Section 498-A and 306 IPC were framed against the accused appellant, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 3. After registration the case, the accused was arrested and on completion of all formalities of investigation, present challan against the accused was presented in the Court" 2. Charges under Section 498-A and 306 IPC were framed against the accused appellant, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 3. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as eight following witnesses:- 4. PW-1, Dr. Dinesh Kumar Passi, along with the Members of the Board Conducted the post mortem examination upon the corpus of Amarjit Kaur, since deceased. He roved the post mortem report, as Ex. P3. On the basis of the Chemical Examiner's report, Ex. P4, and the report of Forensic Medicine Department, Rejendra Hospital, Patiala, Ex. P5, he opined that the death in the present case occurred due to drowning. PW-2, Charanjit Singh, the complaint, while appearing in the witness box, reiterated the version given by him in the complaint Ex. P6. He further deposed that the dead body of the deceased was recovered from Bhakra Bridge of Village Drauli and photographs were taken on the spot form where the dead body was taken out form the Bhakra Canal. He identified the accused, present in the Court. PW-3, Kala Singh, cousin of the deceased, also corroborated the statement of the complainant. He identified his signatures on inquest report, Ex. P7, prepared by the police at the spot. PW-4, HC Karnail Singh and PW-5, HC Amajit Singh, are formal witnesses, who tendered in evidence their duly sworn affidavits, Ex. PW 4/A and PW 5/A, respectively. PW-6, Manjit Singh, proved the photographs, Ex. PW 6/A to PW/6P, taken by him at the spot i.e. the bridge of Village Drauli-Bakraha. PW-7, ASI Harbhajan Singh, is the Investigation Officer, who deposed regarding the investigation carried out by him. PW-8, Surjit Singh, Ex. Sarpanch of Village Dhanetha, also corroborated the prosecution version. 5. Statement of the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. Was recorded while putting all the incriminating circumstances and material evidence against him, to which he denied and pleaded innocence. In defence, he examined DW 1 Naib Singh, who deposed that he was Sarpanch of Village Gujjran from 2008 to 2013. He knew accused Harbans Singh, who has two daughters and one son who had already expired. In defence, he examined DW 1 Naib Singh, who deposed that he was Sarpanch of Village Gujjran from 2008 to 2013. He knew accused Harbans Singh, who has two daughters and one son who had already expired. He further deposed that during his tenure as Sarpanch, no complaint from Amarjit Kaur or her her family members was received against the accused or his parents at any stage. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the both the parties and perusing the material evidence available on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced accused-appellant, as noticed at the outset of this judgment. 7. Aggrieved against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the appellant preferred this appeal, which was admitted by this Court on 30.06.2014, by this Court. 8. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the ingredients of Sections 306 and 498-A IPC are not made out in the present case. The marriage in the instant case was more than 14 years old. Except the bald statement of the complainant, there is nothing on record to show that the deceased was ever subjected to cruelty by the appellant on my account. The allegation that the deceased was being harassed for not giving birth to a male child is also unfounded as a male child was born to her who unfortunately expired a few months thereafter. It is further contended that at the time of the incident, the deceased was staying at her parental home. Her parents wanted the deceased to leave the matrimonial home and start residing with them. There is nothing on record to show that the appellant abetted the deceased to commit suicide as the necessary ingredient of 'intention' is missing. 9. On the other hand, the learned State counsel submits that the deceased died an unnatural death. She was being constantly harassed for bringing less dowry and not being able to deliver a male child. The testimonies of the complainant, withstood the test of lengthy cross-examination, as well as the other prosecution witnesses are sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused appellant. 10. I have heard the learned counsels for both the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. 11. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the death in the instant case occurred due to drowning, i.e. under unnatural circumstances. 10. I have heard the learned counsels for both the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. 11. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the death in the instant case occurred due to drowning, i.e. under unnatural circumstances. In the complaint, the complainant alleged that the deceased was subject to cruelty for bringing less dowry and not giving birth to a male child. The appellant, who is the husband of the deceased, was convicted for the commissions of offences punishable under Section 306 and 498-A IPC. In order to determine whether the ingredients of these Sections are fulfilled in the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is considered appropriated to first understand the import of these Sections. Section 306 IPC reads as under:- 306. Abetment of suicide.- If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Comments Abetment of attempt to commit suicide (i) It has been held that once the offence of abetment of committing suicide is clearly made out against accused, despite the fact that specific charge under Section 306 was not framed against accused, would not preclude court from convicting accused for offence found proved; (ii) The basic constituents of an offence under section 306, are suicidal death and abetment thereof; (iii) To attract the ingredients of abetment, the intention of the accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide is necessary; Section 498-A IPC reads as under:- 498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty. Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subject such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend three years and shall also be liable to fine. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty. Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subject such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend three years and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation.-For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means- (a) any willful conduct which is 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 (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or (b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand." Section 107 IPC reads as under:- 107. Abetment of a thing.- A person abets the doing of a 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. In order to bring home guilt to the appellant, the prosecution was required to prove that the deceased was being harassed by the appellant for bringing less dowry and for not giving birth to a male child and she was instigated by the appellant to commit suicide. It is admitted case of the parties that the marriage in question was more than fourteen years old. The complainant while appearing PW 2, has deposed that at the time of marriage, sufficient dowry articles were given to Amarjit Kaur. After the marriage, the accused started to give beatings to the deceased and taunted her for bringing less dowry he has also claimed that Panchayats were convened and an application was also moved before the Women Cell, where the compromise was got effected. However, from the evidence on record, there no documentary evidence to substantiate the assertion of the complainant. After the marriage, the accused started to give beatings to the deceased and taunted her for bringing less dowry he has also claimed that Panchayats were convened and an application was also moved before the Women Cell, where the compromise was got effected. However, from the evidence on record, there no documentary evidence to substantiate the assertion of the complainant. There is no specific date or time mentioned with regard to any incident of harassment on account of demand of dowry. The marriage survived for fourteen years. Thus, in the considered opinion of the Curt, the charges under Section 498-A IPC are not proved against the appellant. 13. The next point for determination is whether there was any intention of the accused to aid to instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide. 14. The complainant has alleged that on 30.8.2012, the deceased was given beatings by her husband, Harbans Singh-appellant, and his parents, Gurcharan Singh and Ghoti Kaur. The complainant along with his parents reached village Gujjran where the Panchayat was convened and the deceased was retained at her matrimonial home. She was again given beatings during the night time. On 31.08.2012, the deceased came to Samana and committed suicide after jumping into Bkahra Canal. On the contrary, during his cross-examination, the complainant admitted that the deceased had come to their village five days prior to the occurrence. She jumped in the canal while returning back to her matrimonial village. Another important aspect of the matter is that the complainant did not mention about the birth of a male child to the couple either in the FIR or in his examination-in-chief. However, during his cross-examination, he admitted that the deceased had also given birth to a male child, who unfortunately died after one year of his birth. Thus, from the above, it is apparent that there is nothing on record to suggest that the deceased was instigated by appellant to commit suicide. 15. Another material witness produced by the prosecution is that ASI Harbhajan Singh, PW-7, who is the Investigating Officer of the case, in his cross-examination, has stated that no dispute was ever reported to Police Station, City Samana, pertaining to the appellant and his wife, Amarjit Kaur, since deceased. He also admitted the fact of not recording the statement of any co-villager of the accused regarding the fact of birth of a male child to the couple. He also admitted the fact of not recording the statement of any co-villager of the accused regarding the fact of birth of a male child to the couple. He also denied having made any investigation with regard to the harassment and beatings given to the deceased by the accused during her lifetime. He also stated that Charanjit Singh, complainant, did not disclose the source from where the received the information regard jumping of Amarjit Kaur in the canal. There is no eye-witness account in this case either. 16. PW-2, Charanjit Singh has admitted in his cross-examination that the canal in which Amarjit Kaur jumped was at a distance of 25 kms from his village i.e. parental village; of the deceased that Amarijit Kaur came to her parental village five days prior to the occurrence; and that she jumped in the canal while she was returning to her in-laws' village. This witness further admitted that he moved an application against Harbans Singh in the Women Cell, Sangrur regarding harassment of Amarjit Kaur by Harbans Singh. It has Come in evidence that the accused and the deceased had been residing separately since 2004, and the parents of the appellant Harbans Singh Were yet alive. Admittedly, the marriage of deceased Amarjit Kaur with appellant Harbans Singh was solemnized about fourteen years prior to the ill-fated occurrence. After such a long period, the allegations of demand of dowry appear to be unrealistic. It has come in evidence that only peerah-set was given to the deceased by her maternal uncle at the time of marriage. There might be some problem in the parental family of the deceased or there may be financial problem in her in-laws' house. In all such cases, the tendency of false implication of the husband and in laws in often noticed. There is no direct evidence available on record that the appellant had abetted the commission of crime or treated the deceased with cruelty. The fact that the deceases had only two daughters and his son expired, cannot be ignored as in the rural society, family, particularly the womenfolk curse such a woman who has no male child. The possibility of the deceased being under depression cannot be ruled out in this case, which has not been probed either by the investigating Officer or truly put forth by the prosecution. 17. The possibility of the deceased being under depression cannot be ruled out in this case, which has not been probed either by the investigating Officer or truly put forth by the prosecution. 17. In Shunti @ Raja v. State of Haryana, 2008 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 865, this Court has held as under:- "17. Each and every case of suicide is not necessarily a result of abetment. Right from the day when human being is born suicides have been committed. In the present days, a convenient mode has been adopted by the relations and the Investigating agency to name accused as abettor in each case of suicide. It is incumbent upon the Investigating Officer and the person carrying out inquest proceedings to find out especially when the person who committed suicide is a male, his previous medical record, history of his behavior a few days before the suicide. Statements of neighbors or relations regarding his behavior, orientation or manner of interaction a few days before the occurrence, should be recorded, before report under Section 173 Criminal Procedure Code is submitted." In M. Mohan v. State Tr. Dy. Supdt. of Police, 2011 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 272 : 2011 (2) Recent Apex Judgments 161 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, has observed as under:- "45. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. 46. the intention of the Legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this court are clear that in order to convict a person under section 306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he/she committed suicide. 50. Undoubtedly, the deceased had died because of hanging. The deceased was undoubtedly hyper-sensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences which happen in day-to-day life, in a joint family, instances of this kind are not very uncommon. Human sensitivity of each individual has his own idea of self-esteem and self-respect. Different people behave differently in the same situation. 50. Undoubtedly, the deceased had died because of hanging. The deceased was undoubtedly hyper-sensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences which happen in day-to-day life, in a joint family, instances of this kind are not very uncommon. Human sensitivity of each individual has his own idea of self-esteem and self-respect. Different people behave differently in the same situation. It is unfortunate that such an episode of suicide had taken place in the family. But the question remains to be answered is whether the appellants can be connected with that unfortunate incident in any manner?" 18. In the present case, no investigation was conducted with regard to the behavioural pattern, orientation, etc. of the deceased, immediately, before the occurrence, by associating the neighbors and relatives by the prosecuting agency. There is nothing on record to prove any active act or direct act on the apart of the appellant which led the deceased to commit suicide, or other such compelling circumstances that she was left with no other option but no commit suicide. Thus, the most essential ingredient to being the offence within the ambit of Section 306 IPC or Section 498-A IPC is missing in this case. So, the appellant must be given benefit of doubt. In view of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed; the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence are set aside; and the appellant is acquitted of the charges framed against him. He be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.