JUDGMENT : Unfortunate event has occurred, where mother and child, aged about 6 years, were forced to commit suicide by Jumping from 5th floor of the Seva Sadan Hospital, Ranchi where mother was working as a nurse, because of conduct of the appellants Fulchand Mahto, who is the husband, Shatrughan Mahto, who is the brother-in-law and Jatila Bala, who is the sister-in-law of the deceased. The mother Laxmi Kumari took her son Ajay Kumar aged about 6 years, wrote a suicide note, which has been proved and marked as exhibit-5 and committed suicide, shows the mental agony of the deceased Laxmi Kumari. 2. Heard, learned counsels for the appellants, Mr. Hemant Kumar Shikarwar assisted by Mr. C.B.P. Srivastava and Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State. 3. The instant Criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 26.06.2004 and order of sentence dated 28.06.2004, passed by the learned 5th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in Sessions Trial No. 484 of 2001, whereby, these appellants have been convicted for the offence committed and punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for eight years and a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months each. But, by the same impugned judgment learned trial Court has acquitted the appellants of the charge under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. The prosecution case, is based upon, fardbeyan of Karam Singh Mahto (P.W.4) recorded by Sub-Inspector of police, Kotwali, Police Station on 02.04.2000 at about 19.00 hrs., wherein the informant has stated, that his daughter Laxmi Kumari was married with accused Fulchand Mahto, son of Guru Charan Mahto, resident of village Salsur, P.S. Sonahatu, District-Ranchi in the year 1994 and at that time Laxmi Kumari was undergoing training of nursing course. After marriage, Laxmi Kumari went to her in-laws house. It has been alleged that after 16 months from the date of marriage, Laxmi Kumari was driven out from house by her husband after assaulting. On being asked, Laxmi Kumari told her father that Rs.2,000/- was demanded by husband from her. It has further been alleged that informant sent back her daughter to her in-laws house. It has further been alleged that after six months from that date, husband of Laxmi Kumari again demanded Rs.2,000/- to pursue teacher's training course. On being asked, Laxmi Kumari told her father that Rs.2,000/- was demanded by husband from her. It has further been alleged that informant sent back her daughter to her in-laws house. It has further been alleged that after six months from that date, husband of Laxmi Kumari again demanded Rs.2,000/- to pursue teacher's training course. Thereafter, Fulchand Mahto, his brother-in-law Shatrughan Mahto and his sister Jatila Bala have demanded money on the plea of teacher's training. For the last four years, Laxmi Kumari was working as nurse at Nagarmal Modi Seva Sadan Hospital at Ranchi. Informant has stated that his daughter has disclosed two weeks before the date of incidence, that Fulchand Mahto, Jatila Bala and Shatrughan Mahto will not allow her to remain alive, because they used to torture her in the hostel also, where she is residing. They were also complaining about illicit relation of Laxmi Kumari with some one. The husband of Laxmi Kumari was also complaining, that she used to give money to her parents but did not pay any amount to her in-laws house. It has further been alleged that on 02.04.2000 at about 11.30 A.M. Shatrughan Mahto (brother-in-law) and Jatila Bala (sister-in-law) have met Laxmi Kumari in the hostel and after some time Laxmi Kumari along with her son Ajay Kumar, committed suicide by Jumping from 5th floor of the Hospital. It has further been alleged that because of torture by Fulchand Mahto, Jatila Bala and Shatrughan Mahto, Laxmi Kumari along with her son Ajay Kumar have committed suicide. 5. On the basis of the written report of the informant, Police Registered First Information Report bearing Kotwali P.S. Case No. 87 of 2000, dated 02.04.2000, under Sections 306 and 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code against all three named accused persons. 6. After investigation, the police submitted charge sheet vide charge sheet no. 281 of 2000, dated 03.07.2000, under Sections 306 and 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code against accused Fulchand Mahto, mentioning Shatrughan Mahto and Jatila Bala as absconder. Second charge sheet vide charge sheet no. 320 of 2000 dated 31.07.2000 under Sections 306 and 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code has been submitted against accused persons Shatrughan Mahto and Jatila Bala. 7. The cognizance of the offence has been taken vide order dated 14.07.2000 and the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions vide order dated 19.09.2001. 8. 320 of 2000 dated 31.07.2000 under Sections 306 and 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code has been submitted against accused persons Shatrughan Mahto and Jatila Bala. 7. The cognizance of the offence has been taken vide order dated 14.07.2000 and the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions vide order dated 19.09.2001. 8. The learned trial Court has framed charge against all three accused/appellants, on 06.03.2002, under Sections 498(A) and 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code, to which the accused/appellants have pleaded their innocence and thus, they were put under trial. 9. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined altogether six prosecution witnesses and also adduced a number of documentary evidence up to exhibits-5. Dr. Shambhu Sharan has been examined as P.W.1, Jayanti Kumari (daughter of the informant and sister of deceased Laxmi Kumari) has been examined as P.W.2, Kiran Sinha (Nurse, working at Seva Sadan Hospital) has been examined as P.W.3, Karam Singh Mahto (informant and father of the deceased Laxmi Kumari) has been examined as P.W.4, Nirmla Kumari (Nurse, working at Seva Sadan Hospital) has been examined as P.W.5 but she has been declared hostile by the prosecution and Rita Kumari (Nurse, working at Seva Sadan Hospital) has been examined as P.W.6. Postmortem report of deceased Laxmi Kumari has been proved and marked as exhibit-1, postmortem report of deceased Ajay Kumar has been proved and marked as exhibit-2, signature of Jayanti Kumari (P.W.2) on the inquest report of deceased Laxmi Kumari has been proved and marked as exhibit-3, signature of Jayanti Kumari (P.W.2) on the inquest report of deceased Ajay Kumar has been proved and marked as exhibit-3/A, signature of Jayanti Kumari (P.W.2) on the fardbeyan has been proved and marked as exhibit-4, signature of the informant Karam Singh Mahto (P.W.4) on the fardbeyan has been proved and marked as exhibit-4/A, signature of Karam Singh Mahto (P.W.4) on the inquest report of deceased Laxmi Kumari has been proved and marked as exhibit-3/b, signature of Karam Singh Mahto (P.W.4) on the inquest report of deceased Ajay Kumar has been proved and marked as exhibit-3/c. suicide note written by Laxmi Kumari (deceased) has been proved and marked as exhibit-5. 10. 10. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the appellants have been recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., on 07.06.2004, to which they have denied about any allegations levelled against them and stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case but admitted marriage of Laxmi Kumari with Fulchand Mahto. 11. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on the basis of material available on record, learned trial Court has passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. Being aggrieved at and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the present criminal appeal has been jointly preferred by the appellants before this Hon’ble Court, assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. 12. Heard, learned counsels for the appellants, Mr. Hemant Kumar Shikarwar assisted by Mr. C.B.P. Srivastava. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted, that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is bad in law and cannot sustain in the eyes of law. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that half of the prosecution story has been disbelieved by the learned trial Court by acquitting the appellants under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that no ingredient for constituting an offence under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code has been brought on record nor any evidence with respect to abatement of the offence has been brought on record against the appellants. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that it is admitted fact that deceased Laxmi Kumari committed suicide along with her son Ajay Kumar by jumping from 5th floor of Seva Sadan Hospital but there is no ingredient to suggest that such incident of suicide has taken place because of the abatement by the appellants. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that it is admitted fact that deceased Laxmi Kumari committed suicide along with her son Ajay Kumar by jumping from 5th floor of Seva Sadan Hospital but there is no ingredient to suggest that such incident of suicide has taken place because of the abatement by the appellants. Learned counsel for the appellants has referred section 113A of Indian Evidence Act which reads as follows:- Presumption as to abatement of suicide by a married woman- “When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the Court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband.” Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that the investigating officer has not been examined in this case nor the learned trial Court has asked the appellants about suicide note of the deceased Laxmi Kumari in their statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. As such, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted, that appellants be acquitted of charge and conviction under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 13. Heard, learned counsel for the State, Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for the State has submitted, that impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is well founded, based on the material available on record and learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that postmortem reports of Laxmi Kumari and Ajay Kumar have been proved by Dr. Shambhu Sharan P.W.1, which have been marked as exhibits-1 and 2 respectively. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that P.W.3 Kiran Sinha and P.W.6 Rita Kumari, both were working as Nurse at Seva Sadan Hospital have fully supported the prosecution case to the extent that, they have stated about presence and meeting of appellant no.2 Shatrughan Mahato and appellant no.3 Jatila Bala at Seva Sadan with deceased Laxmi Kumari prior to the occurrence. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that suicide note (exhibit-5) written by the victim Laxmi Kumari is sufficient to prove that, husband Fulchand Mahto, Shatrughan Mahato (brother-in-law) and Jatila Bala (sister-in-law) of the deceased have forced the deceased Laxmi Kumari to commit suicide as Laxmi Kumari has categorically mentioned in her suicide note, that she is taking her son for committing suicide as the deceased Laxmi Kumari thought it proper that she cannot leave her son, a small boy, at the mercy of the others as he is not a mature one. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that evidence brought on record by way of suicide note (exhibit-5) of the deceased Laxmi Kumari coupled with the evidence of P.W.3, Kiran Sinha and P.W.6, Rita Kumari are sufficient for convicting these appellants under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code, as they are independent witnesses working as Nurse at Nagarmal Seva Sadan Hospital, where deceased Laxmi Kumari was also working. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that the informant Karam Singh Mahto (P.W.4) and Jayanti Kumari (P.W.2), daughter of the informant and sister of the deceased Laxmi Kumari have also supported the prosecution case. All the prosecution witnesses have been cross-examined at length but nothing has been elucidated by the defence in their cross-examination to dispel the prosecution case. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that no question with regard to suicide note has been asked by the learned trial court while recording statement of the appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The appellants have neither challenged the authenticity or genuineness of the suicide note rather, from the evidence of informant, Karam Singh Mahto (P.W.4), it appears that nothing has been brought on record to show that handwriting and signature of Laxmi Kumari found on the suicide note has been doubted during cross-examination by the defence, as such, no prejudice has been caused to the appellants. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that non-examination of the investigating officer has not caused any prejudice to the appellants as nothing has been shown by the accused/appellants during cross-examination of the other prosecution witnesses to suggest that examination of the investigating officer was essentially required to elucidate the facts and contradiction to prove their innocence and as such, non-examination of the investigating officer has not caused any prejudice to the appellants. Learned State counsel has referred the judgment of Pawan Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh, as reported in (2017)7 SCC 780 . Learned counsel for the State has submitted that though the case referred is based on dying declaration, but the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is applicable in this case. As present case is based upon the suicide note, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in Pawan Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh (supra):- “33:-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.” 34. The word ‘abetment’ has not been explained in Section 306 IPC. In this context, the definition of abetment as provided under Section 107 IPC is pertinent. Section 306 IPC seeks to punish those who abet the commission of suicide of other. Whether the person has abetted the commission of suicide of another or not is to be gathered from facts and circumstances of each case and to be found out by continuous conduct of the accused, involving his mental element. Such a requirement can be perceived from the reading of Section 107 IPC. Section 107 IPC reads as under:- “Section 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. Explanation 1.—A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. Explanation 1.—A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. Illustration A, a public officer, is authorized by a warrant from a Court of Justice to apprehend Z. B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z, wilfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the apprehension of C. Explanation 2.—Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.” “Abetment”, thus, means certain amount of active suggestion or support to do the act. 36. The word “instigate” literally means to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. A person is said to instigate another person when he actively suggests or stimulates him to an act by any means or language, direct or indirect, whether it takes the form of express solicitation or of hints, insinuation or encouragement. Instigation may be in (express) words or may be by (implied) conduct. 37. The word “urge forward” means to advise or try hard to persuade somebody to do something, to make a person to move more quickly in the particular direction, specially by pushing or forcing such person. Therefore, a person instigating another has to “goad” or “urge forward” the latter with the intention to provoke, incite or encourage the doing of an act with a latter. In order to prove abetment, it must be shown that the accused kept on urging or annoying the deceased by words, taunts until the deceased reacted. A casual remark or something said in routine or usual conversation should not be construed or misunderstood as “abetment”. 39. In Praveen Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal, it has been ruled: (SCC p. 741, para 18) “18. In fact, from the above discussion it is apparent that instigation has to be gathered from the circumstances of a particular case. A casual remark or something said in routine or usual conversation should not be construed or misunderstood as “abetment”. 39. In Praveen Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal, it has been ruled: (SCC p. 741, para 18) “18. In fact, from the above discussion it is apparent that instigation has to be gathered from the circumstances of a particular case. No straitjacket formula can be laid down to find out as to whether in a particular case there has been instigation which forced the person to commit suicide. In a particular case, there may not be direct evidence in regard to instigation which may have direct nexus to suicide. Therefore, in such a case, an inference has to be drawn from the circumstances and it is to be determined whether circumstances had been such which in fact had created the situation that a person felt totally frustrated and committed suicide. 40. In Amalendu Pal v. State of W.B., the Court, after referring to the authorities in Randhir Singh, Kishori Lal v. State of M.P. and Kishangiri Mangalgiri Goswami V. State of Gujarat, has held: (Amalendu Pal case 24, SCC p. 712, para 12) “12. Thus, this Court has consistently taken the view that before holding an accused guilty of an offence under Section 306 IPC, the court must scrupulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced before it in order to find out whether the cruelty and harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with no other alternative but to put an end to her life. It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable.” 41. A two-Judge Bench in Netai Dutta v. State of W.B., while dwelling on the concept of abetment under Section 107 IPC especially in the context of suicide note, observed: (SCC p. 661, paras 6-7) “6. A two-Judge Bench in Netai Dutta v. State of W.B., while dwelling on the concept of abetment under Section 107 IPC especially in the context of suicide note, observed: (SCC p. 661, paras 6-7) “6. In the suicide note, except referring to the name of the appellant at two places, there is no reference of any act or incidence whereby the appellant herein is alleged to have committed any wilful act or omission or intentionally aided or instigated the deceased Pranab Kumar Nag in committing the act of suicide. There is no case that the appellant has played any part or any role in any conspiracy, which ultimately instigated or resulted in the commission of suicide by deceased Pranab Kumar Nag. 7. Apart from the suicide note, there is no allegation made by the complainant that the appellant herein in any way was harassing his brother, Pranab Kumar Nag. The case registered against the appellant is without any factual foundation. The contents of the alleged suicide note do not in any way make out the offence against the appellant. The prosecution initiated against the appellant would only result in sheer harassment to the appellant without any fruitful result. In our opinion, the learned Single Judge seriously erred in holding that the first information report against the appellant disclosed the elements of a cognizable offence. There was absolutely no ground to proceed against the appellant herein. We find that this is a fit case where the extraordinary power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to be invoked. We quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the appellant and accordingly allow the appeal.” 42. At this juncture, we think it appropriate to reproduce two paragraphs from Chitresh Kumar Chopra. They are : (SCC p. 611, paras 16 & 19) “16. Speaking for the three-Judge Bench in Ramesh Kumar case, R.C. Lahoti, J. (as His Lordship then was) said that instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do “an act”. To satisfy the requirement of “instigation”, though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes “instigation” must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. To satisfy the requirement of “instigation”, though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes “instigation” must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. Where the accused had, by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct, created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide, in which case, an “instigation” may have to be inferred. A word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation. 19. As observed in Ramesh Kumar, where the accused by his acts or by a continued course of conduct creates such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide, an “instigation” may be inferred. In other words, in order to prove that the accused abetted commission of suicide by a person, it has to be established that: (i) the accused kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by words, deeds or wilful omission or conduct which may even be a wilful silence until the deceased reacted or pushed or forced the deceased by his deeds, words or wilful omission or conduct to make the deceased move forward more quickly in a forward direction; and (ii) that the accused had the intention to provoke, urge or encourage the deceased to commit suicide while acting in the manner noted above. Undoubtedly, presence of mens rea is the necessary concomitant of instigation.” This Court again observed: (SCC pp. 611-12, para 20) “20. … The question as to what is the cause of a suicide has no easy answers because suicide ideation and behaviours in human beings are complex and multifaceted. Different individuals in the same situation react and behave differently because of the personal meaning they add to each event, thus accounting for individual vulnerability to suicide. Each individual’s suicidability pattern depends on his inner subjective experience of mental pain, fear and loss of self-respect. Each of these factors are crucial and exacerbating contributor to an individual’s vulnerability to end his own life, which may either be an attempt for self-protection or an escapism from intolerable self.” 46. The harassment caused to her had become intolerable and unbearable. Each of these factors are crucial and exacerbating contributor to an individual’s vulnerability to end his own life, which may either be an attempt for self-protection or an escapism from intolerable self.” 46. The harassment caused to her had become intolerable and unbearable. The father had deposed that the girl had told him on number of occasions and he had complained to the Pradhan. All these amount to active part played by the accused. It is not a situation where a person is insulted on being asked to pay back a loan. It is not a situation where someone feels humiliated on a singular act. It is a different situation altogether. The young girl living in a village was threatened and teased constantly. She could not bear it any longer. There is evidence that the parents belong to the poor strata of the society. As the materials on record would reflect, the father could not afford her treatment when case of his daughter was referred to the hospital at Chandigarh. The impecuniosity of the family is manifest. It is clearly evident from the materials brought on record that the conduct of the accused was absolutely proactive. 48. In a civilized society male chauvinism has no room. The Constitution of India confers the affirmative rights on women and the said rights are perceptible from Article 15 of the Constitution. When the right is conferred under the Constitution, it has to be understood that there is no condescendation. A man should not put his ego or, for that matter, masculinity on a pedestal and abandon the concept of civility. Egoism must succumb to law. Equality has to be regarded as the summum bonum of the constitutional principle in this context. The instant case portrays the deplorable depravity of the appellant that has led to a heart breaking situation for a young girl who has been compelled to put an end to her life. Therefore, the High Court has absolutely correctly reversed the judgment of acquittal and imposed the sentence. The instant case portrays the deplorable depravity of the appellant that has led to a heart breaking situation for a young girl who has been compelled to put an end to her life. Therefore, the High Court has absolutely correctly reversed the judgment of acquittal and imposed the sentence. It has appositely exercised the jurisdiction and we concur with the same.” Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that oral evidence brought on record coupled with the averment made in the suicide note are sufficient to establish that Laxmi Kumari was compelled to take the extreme steps to the extent that Laxmi Kumari along with her son Ajay Kumar aged about 6 years have committed suicide by jumping from the 5th floor of Nagarmal Seva Sadan Hospital, where Laxmi Kumari was working as Nurse and residing with her son Ajay Kumar for last four years in the hostel. Learned counsel for the State has further relied upon a judgment as reported in AIR 1990 Supreme Court 209 in the case of Gurbachan Singh vs. Satpal Singh and others, as held at para 34 as follows:- “it has also been found on a consideration of the circumstantial evidence that she was compelled to take the extreme step of committing suicide as the accused persons had subjected her to cruelty by constant taunts, mal-treatment and also by alleging that she has been carrying an illegitimate child. The suicide having been committed within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage in accordance with the provisions of this Section, the Court may presume having regard to all the other circumstances of the case which we have set out earlier that such suicide had been abetted by the husband and his relations”. Learned counsel for the State has referred the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court as referred above and submits that, impugned judgment of conviction is based on material brought on record and the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants. 14. Heard, learned counsel for the appellants Mr. Hemant Kumar Shikarwar assisted by Mr. C.B.P. Srivastava, Advocates and Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the records, i.e. First Information Report, framing of the charge, evidence of six prosecution witnesses, five exhibits of the prosecution side and the statement of the appellants recorded under Section 313 Cr. Hemant Kumar Shikarwar assisted by Mr. C.B.P. Srivastava, Advocates and Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the records, i.e. First Information Report, framing of the charge, evidence of six prosecution witnesses, five exhibits of the prosecution side and the statement of the appellants recorded under Section 313 Cr. P. C. as well as impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. This Court has scrutinized the evidence of prosecution witness. The evidence of independent witnesses such as P.W.5 Nirmla Kumari and P.W.6 Rita Kumari are in complete consonance with the prosecution case as lodged by P.W.4 Karam Singh Mahto, who is the father of the deceased Laxmi Kumari. The prosecution case has also been supported by P.W.2 Jayanti Kumari. These witnesses have been cross-examined by the defence but nothing have been elucidated to disbelieve their evidence. The evidence is consistent that, marriage of Laxmi Kumari was solemnized with appellant no.1 Fulchand Mahto in the year of 1994 and the occurrence of suicide took place on 02.04.2000 within seven years of the marriage. The evidence is consistent that after 16 months of marriage there was strain relationship between wife and husband. Laxmi Kumari, being a nurse was working at Nagarmal Seva Sadan Hospital and was residing at hostel along with her son Ajay Kumar, where she was disturbed by the appellants Fulchand Mahto, Shatrughan Mahto and Jatila Bala, who are the husband, brother-in-law and sister-in-law respectively of the deceased Laxmi Kumari. They were visiting the hostel time and again and thereby disturbing the peace and causing mental agony of the victim Laxmi Kumari. On the fateful day soon before the occurrence, Shartughan Mahto and Jatila Bala have also met the deceased Laxmi Kumari, who was on duty. This fact has been corroborated by P.W.5 Nirmla Kumari and P.W.6 Rita Kumari by saying that soon after their departure, the victim Laxmi Kumari along with her son, committed suicide leaving behind suicide note in the box. The defence has not challenged the authenticity and genuineness of the suicide note. This Court is of the opinion that, these three appellants are responsible for abatement and as such, the victim was compelled to commit suicide along with her minor son. The victim has categorically mentioned in her suicide note that why she is taking her minor son Ajay Kumar for committing suicide. This Court is of the opinion that, these three appellants are responsible for abatement and as such, the victim was compelled to commit suicide along with her minor son. The victim has categorically mentioned in her suicide note that why she is taking her minor son Ajay Kumar for committing suicide. The mental status of Laxmi Kumari as it appears from the suicide note are sufficient to establish that she has committed suicide because of the abatement caused by these three appellants. Under the aforesaid circumstances, in the background that the Dr. Shambhu Sharan, P.W.1 has proved the postmortem reports of deceased Laxmi Kumari and Ajay Kumar, which have been marked as exhibits 1 and 2 respectively and the evidence of Jayanti Kumari, P.W.2, sister of Laxmi Kumari and daughter of the informant is also supporting the prosecution case lodged by Karam Singh Mahto, P.W.4, father of Laxmi Kumari, this Court is satisfied that the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Thus, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence in Sessions Trial No.484 of 2001 in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 87 of 2000, corresponding to G.R. No. 673 of 2000 is hereby upheld and affirmed. Accordingly, this Court is not interfering with the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, which is being upheld and affirmed by this Hon'ble Court. 15. In the result, the instant Criminal Appeal stands dismissed. 16. The appellants who are on bail, their bail bonds are hereby cancelled and they are directed to surrender before the learned trial Court forthwith to serve out rest of the sentence. The learned trial Court is directed to take all methods under law for procurement of their attendance to serve out rest of the sentence, if appellants are not surrendering before the Court below. 17. Let L.C.R. along with a copy of this judgment be sent to the court concerned at once.