JUDGMENT : 1. These are the two appeals preferred against the judgment and order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.27, Ahmedabad, whereby the Trial Court has given benefit of doubt to the respondents from the offences punishable under Sections 306, 498(A) read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal Appeal No.437 of 2018 has been preferred by the State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 30.12.2017 passed in Sessions Case No.38 of 2017, whereas Criminal Appeal No.205 of 2017 has been preferred by the original complainant Hashumatiben Kiritbhai Patel under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by this acquittal. 2. Both the appeals arise from the very Sessions case and, therefore,after admitting both of them, it is decided to proceed with them for the purpose of final hearing together. The brief facts leading to these appeals are as follows:- 1. The marriage of the deceased Krupa was solemnized with the respondent-No.1,accused Dhavalkumar Updeshbhai Patel, in relation, respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 were respectively Krupa's father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law. They were residing together. It is the case of prosecution that prior to 10.09.2016 they are alleged to have harassed the deceased and thereby abated her to commit the act of suicide by physically and mentally torturing her. The harassment also continued by also torturing and taunting her with regard to the household work as well as on her failing to know stitching work. She was also alleged of being illiterate and having no capacity to make proper food and lacked in due care. It is alleged that such mental and physical torture coupled with demand of dowry made her weak and ill. She was dropped at her parental home by her husband on 05.06.2016. 2. Thereafter, she was medically treated as her hemoglobin level fell down to 4%. On persuading respondent No.1, he had taken her back but, the ill-treatment had continued so did the torture & she was deserted on 13.08.2016. She was once again on the occasion of Rakshabandhan on 17.08.2016 was dropped at her parental home where she complained to her friend Hemakshi and Harshida about ill treatment meted out by her inlaws. On persuading respondent No.1, he had taken her back but, the ill-treatment had continued so did the torture & she was deserted on 13.08.2016. She was once again on the occasion of Rakshabandhan on 17.08.2016 was dropped at her parental home where she complained to her friend Hemakshi and Harshida about ill treatment meted out by her inlaws. She eventually hanged herself on 10.09.2016 and there was a false information given to the complainant that her daughter had dental problem and therefore, was taken to the clinic and in about 10 minutes, another telephonic message was received that she was taken to the Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad where she was found dead. 3. The accidental death was registered as Case No.71 of 2016 and thereafter, the police started inquiring. The inquest report in the morning was carried out by the Executive Magistrate and thereafter, the dead body was sent for postmortem on 11.09.2016. 4. The FIR was lodged being I-C.R.No.109 of 2016 by Odhav Police under Sections 306, 498(A) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code after about 22 hours since the AD inquiry was going on and once the FIR was lodged and investigated, the same culminated into filing of the charge sheet on 11.11.2016, which was committed to the City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad. 5. The case was numbered as Sessions Case NO.38 of 2017 and the charges came to be framed on 16.03.2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 498(A) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution examined in all 15 witnesses, the details of which are as follows: P.W. Nos. 5. The case was numbered as Sessions Case NO.38 of 2017 and the charges came to be framed on 16.03.2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 498(A) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution examined in all 15 witnesses, the details of which are as follows: P.W. Nos. Name of the person Description Exhibit 1 Hasumatiben Kirtibhai Patel Mother of victim-Complainant 12 2 Kirtibhai Madhavlal Patel Father of victim 15 3 Indravadan Bhikhabhai Patel Neighbour of complainant 16 4 Vishnubhai Rupsinh Thakore Panch of seizure of cloths of deceased 17 5 Bharatbhai Dahyabhai Chavda Panch of scene of offence 29 6 Raamjibhai Kalabhai Chavda Panch of scene of offence 31 7 Pankajbhai Aatmaram Patel Panch of Inquest Panchnama 34 8 Arpit Kirtibhai Patel Brother of victim 37 9 Dineshbhai Ganpatbhai Patel Neighbour of Complainant 39 10 Arpitaben Arvindbhai Patel Friend of deceased 41 11 Harshidaben Pravinbhai Patel Friend of deceased 42 12 Dr.Bhavin Shyamlal Shah Doctor performing post mortem 45 13 Bhikhabhai Aatmaram Prajapati Executive Magistrate 48 14 Rasikbhai Virjibhai Nandasana Officer recording FIR 51 15 Aniruddhsinh Navalsinh Solanki Investigating Officer 54 16 Minaben Pravinbhai Patel Defence witness Neighbor of Accused 3. After recordance of the evidence, further statements under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure came to be recorded where all the accused gave standard replies to the incriminating questions that what had been stated by the witnesses is false. In additional version permitted to be stated before the Court, the accused have stated that the victim was suffering from some problem related to the field of Gynaecology and therefore, she may have taken this extreme step. However, they stated that they were unaware of any of the allegations made by the Prosecution. 4. The Court after appreciation of the evidence chose to give benefit of doubts to all the respondents and hence, these appeals. 5. This Court has heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.Hardik Soni, who has urged that evidence of the complainant-mother has been completely disregarded by the Court who has spoken of physical and mental torture to her daughter. The witness has also deposed in her testimony, the manner in which she was ill-treated and eventually chose to end of her life. 5. This Court has heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.Hardik Soni, who has urged that evidence of the complainant-mother has been completely disregarded by the Court who has spoken of physical and mental torture to her daughter. The witness has also deposed in her testimony, the manner in which she was ill-treated and eventually chose to end of her life. Other witnesses have also spoken of such ill treatment and cruelty and even in their extensive cross examination, their versions could not be resiled and nothing adverse has emerged which would render their depositions doubtful. The dispute between the accused and the deceased had continued even though she was consoled and was sent back to her matrimonial home for starting the life afresh. The harassment of the deceased perpetrated by the accused also according to the State has continued and legal presumption available under Section 113 A of the Evidence Act has been overlooked by the Court. All the accused have treated the deceased with cruelty and young lady who had barely begun her life at matrimonial home, within a very narrow span, chose to end the same sadly. He has urged that the Court ought to have applied legal presumption and in absence of any rebuttable evidence, no acquittal could have been contemplated. The grave error is made in not believing the versions of the prosecution witnesses, which are cogent, reliable and unimpeachable. It is further the say of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the medical evidence also clearly supports her act of committing suicide and that also ought to have been taken into consideration. He has taken this Court through the deposition of each witness and has urged that what more evidence could be adduced by the prosecution and the Court also cannot disregard the statutory presumption in case of a married woman whose marriage span is not of seven years. 6. Learned advocate, Mr.A.N.Patel appearing for the appellant-original complainant has urged that the presiding officer has wrongly believed the version of the defence and completely overlooked voluminous evidence established by the prosecution against the accused. It is further urged that ingredients of the abetment as defined under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code are completely disregarded which are: 1. to instigates any person to do that thing; 2. It is further urged that ingredients of the abetment as defined under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code are completely disregarded which are: 1. to instigates any person to do that thing; 2. to engage 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; 3. to intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. 7. He further added that all the respondents-accused have participated in the said act mental as well as physical torture resulting into ending her life. She has further urged that for driving any woman to commit suicide or to endanger her by harassing her or scold her to make unlawful demand for property or valuable thing would get covered under the provisions of Sections 498 (A), 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. He has further urged that Bhakti Maternity Home otherwise has nothing to do with the incident of parents going to Haridwar as PW-8 brother had taken her to the hospital for the treatment which had continued for about one month. With regard to the evidence of panchnama of scene of offence, clothes of the deceased, inquest report, etc. it is urged that merely because the pancha witnesses do not support the case of prosecution, that per se may not be the ground for discarding the case of prosecution. 8. Learned advocate, Mr.Jagdish Satapara and learned advocate Mr.Manoj Dhanak appearing for Respondents No.1 to 4 were permitted to argue separately and independently. 9. It is urged by the learned advocate, Mr.Satapara that there are four kinds of allegations (i) insulting the deceased, (ii) mental cruelty, (iii) giving of less dowry and (iv) Household chores and activity of stitching not known by her, nor had she done the same. He has urged that there has been no cruelty nor any kind of harassment of such a nature which would drive her to commit suicide. Section 498 (A) of the Indian Penal Code provided that any conduct which amounts to physical or mental cruelty would be covered under this provision. However there has been neither any harassment nor any beating and she left her home only once. Section 498 (A) of the Indian Penal Code provided that any conduct which amounts to physical or mental cruelty would be covered under this provision. However there has been neither any harassment nor any beating and she left her home only once. The engagement continued for two and half years and the marriage span was of one year. She has not left any suicidal note, there is no whisper against either brother-in-law or father-in-law. Her parents soon before she died, were at Haridwar and she never confided anything in her mother. What has been alleged is a general wear and tear of the marital life. The husband is an electrical contractor with I.T.I diploma whereas the deceased lady had studied up to the 10th Standard. The couple had enjoyed being engaged for two and half years and therefore, there cannot be a sudden change in the attitude of the in-laws resulting into perpetrating cruelty. They could not be said to have abetted commission of suicide. There is neither any concealment nor any misrepresentation attracting the features of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. 10. So far as the learned advocate, Mr.Manoj Danak is concerned, he has urged that had there been any genuine complaint, parents of deceased could have approached the police, however, nothing of the sort has happened. No witness has spoken of the reason when the husband left the daughter at home. It is the daughter, who has been advised and not the son-in-law. Had there been any fault of son-in-law, he would have been advised by the in-laws. It is alleged that the deceased had serious ailment, which she had not revealed and her hemoglobin had dropped to 4%. She was not kept at her parental home for a long and was dropped back at matrimonial home. There is nothing on the record to indicate that any incident in eight months' period would lead to the commission of death. 11. It is further urged that it is evident that the husband had brought her back from matrimonial home, had he have any ill intention, he could not have gone to the inlaws. She had never gone to her parents sulking from the in-laws. He has urged that there has to be a proof of extreme cruelty by the prosecution, the entire version of prosecution witness does not say that any kind of cruelty was perpetrated. She had never gone to her parents sulking from the in-laws. He has urged that there has to be a proof of extreme cruelty by the prosecution, the entire version of prosecution witness does not say that any kind of cruelty was perpetrated. She lived with her parents after three to four months which is very usual for any girl, the demand of dowry is also not on record. Moreover, they have not spoken to the caste leaders and with the parents of the deceased girl the in-laws had good terms. The story of cruelty is nothing but fabricated. None of the panch witnesses has also supported the case and therefore, it is urged that no interference is desirable. It is further the say of the learned advocate that the Appellate Court is not to interfere with the findings of the Trial Court merely because from the very set of evidence, different conclusion is permissible. 12. Having thus extensively heard learned advocates on both the sides and on closely perusing the evidence which has been adduced by the prosecution on record, the first consideration would be as to whether the ingredients of Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and that of Section 306 of the of the Indian Penal Code are attracted from the versions of the prosecution witness and whether the prosecution succeeded in proving these ingredients which are a must for the court to hold the attraction of these provisions. 13. Before adverting to the facts, the law on the subject deserves consideration Section 498 (A) of the Indian Penal Code deserves reproduction. “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, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. “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, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation.-For the purposes 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.]” 14. The object of this provision is for preventing not only the menace of dowry but to prevent the harassment and torture of the married women. The growing cult of violence against the young aspiring bride in civilized and democratic society had necessitated the introduction of Chapter 20 A containing Section 498 (A) in the Indian Penal Code. For preventing the torture to a woman by her husband and relatives, the legislature realized the gravity of situation and introduced the stringent provision. The consequences of the cruelty which are likely to drive a woman to commit suicide or to cause her grave injury or to endanger her life limb or where mental or physical of the woman is required to be established in order to bring the application for Section 498 (A) of the Indian Penal Code. 15. The Apex Court in case of Akula Ravinder vs. State of Andra Pradesh, reported in AIR 1991 SC 1142 has held that the substantial Section 498 (A) in Indian Penal Code and presumptive Section under 113 A and 113 B of the Evidence Act have been inserted in the respective statute by Criminal Law (Second Amendment Act, 1983). These provisions deal with two distinct offences, the cruelty is a common essential to both sections and that has to be proved. These provisions deal with two distinct offences, the cruelty is a common essential to both sections and that has to be proved. The explanation of Section 498 (A) gives the meaning of cruelty or harassment is the same as prescribed in explanation to Section 498 (A) under which cruelty by itself amounts to an offence and if it is a case of dowry death under Section 304 (B) which is punishable and if such death has occurred within a period of seven years of marriage. Likewise, it is held in case of Krishanlal vs. Union of India, 1994 Cri. Law Gen 3472 (Punjab and Hariyana Full Bench) that the objects of Section 498 (A) is to curb the vice of cruelty to the married woman by her husband or in-laws and to give the object of reality under Section 113 (A) has been introduced in the Evidence Act raising a presumption against the husband or the relatives of the husband this Section has been inserted w.e.f. 25.02.1983 and this is the outcome of certain needs of society to stop all sorts of cruelty towards the married women which is the burning problem of the country. The elements of the cruelty have been classified as under: 1. any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is to drive the woman to commit suicide; 2. any willful conduct which is likely to cause grave injury; or 3. any willful act which is likely to cause the danger to the life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman. 16. The other basic ingredients of Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code is also harassment which is independent of cruelty and if the harassment to the woman is with a view to coerce her on any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand or any property of valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand, the same would attract ingredients of Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. 17. It could be thus said that to constitute an offence under Section 498 A Of IPC (A) the woman must be married, (B) she must be subjected to cruelty and/or harassment and (C) the cruelty or harassment should be from the husband or the relatives of her husband. 16. 17. It could be thus said that to constitute an offence under Section 498 A Of IPC (A) the woman must be married, (B) she must be subjected to cruelty and/or harassment and (C) the cruelty or harassment should be from the husband or the relatives of her husband. 16. So far as Section 306 read with Section 498 A is concerned, it could be said that to bring the case within the ambit of this provision, there has to be a positive evidence that cruelty was of such a nature to drive a woman to commit bodily injury to herself or of a nature that that would drive her to commit suicide. 17. Apt would be to refer to Sections 107 and 306 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 113 (A) of the Evidence Act. “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.” “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.” 18. For these sections to be attracted, the accused who either instigate any person to do the same or engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for doing of things or intentionally aid by any act or omission the doing of things. A person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful 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. A person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful 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 2 of Section 107 of Indian Penal Code prescribed that 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 facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act. 19. It is thus clear that a person who is charged of abetment of commission of suicide, there needs to be an evidence of instigation by that person to do that thing or intentionally aid by an act or illegal omission the doing of that thing either prior to or at the time of commission of an act, in order to facilitate the commission of an act and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act. 20. Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 113A of the Evidence Act, enable the Court to punish husband or relatives of the victim, who has subjected a woman to cruelty, if such woman committed suicide within a period of seven years of a marriage. It is immaterial for Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code whether the cruelty or harassment was caused soon before her death or earlier. Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 113 A is wide enough and if death occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within 7 years of the marriage as a sequel to the cruelty or harassment inflicted on a woman with demand of dowry, the legislature intends that a case needs to be treated as a very serious offence. 21. Reference is also needed at this stage to the decision of Tanu Ram vs. State of M.P., 2010 (10) SC 353. The victim had committed suicide in that case in the 4th year of marriage when she was six months’ pregnant. The Court held that woman in advanced stage of pregnancy would not commit suicide even when treated with cruelty. Reference is also needed at this stage to the decision of Tanu Ram vs. State of M.P., 2010 (10) SC 353. The victim had committed suicide in that case in the 4th year of marriage when she was six months’ pregnant. The Court held that woman in advanced stage of pregnancy would not commit suicide even when treated with cruelty. Only in extreme circumstances may a woman decide to take her life and that of her unborn child when she reaches a point of no return and is in a mental state to take her own life. The Court held that this proved the element of instigation and further section 113(A) of the Evidence Act establishes link between offence under section 498A, 107 and 306 of the Indian Penal Code permitting presumption of commission of offence under section 107 on the basis of evidence adduced to prove an offence under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The Court also held that meaning of cruelty in Explanation to section 113A is the same as in section 498A. Thus, if degree of cruelty is such as to warrant conviction under section 498A, it may be sufficient for a presumption to be drawn under section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act in harmony with section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. 22. In yet another decision of Gurbachan Singh vs. Satpal Singh reported in AIR 1980 SC 209, it was a case of suicide by newly wed girl dying of burn injuries. The question was also whether the suicide was accidental death. The evidence of father and sister of the deceased had been recorded, which stated that the deceased complained of harassment and torture by her in-laws for bringing insufficient dowry. The in-laws also accused the deceased of carrying illegitimate child. It also emerged from the record that father of the deceased stated in the FIR that the deceased committed suicide because of harassment and constant taunts and torture. Information of incident also was not promptly communicated to the father of the deceased and there was a delay in giving medical assistance. There were no burn injuries on finger tips of any member of accused family, which belied, according to the Court, the case of accidental death. It was held that deceased committed suicide at the instigation of her husband and in-laws. There were no burn injuries on finger tips of any member of accused family, which belied, according to the Court, the case of accidental death. It was held that deceased committed suicide at the instigation of her husband and in-laws. The Court had attracted the presumption available under section 113A of the Evidence Act. 23. In the case of State of Punjab vs. Iqbal Singh reported in AIR 1991 SC 1532 , it was a case of abetment of suicide by wife where relationship between spouses was also strained over divorce. Wife had apprehended danger to her life seeking police protection and divorce deed also was subsequently executed, but not acted upon. The wife also attempted to secure her transfer of service to another school frustrated by her husband. There was a severe beating given to the deceased. The husband was held responsible for creating circumstances, which provoked or forced wife to commit the suicide. He was held liable to be convicted under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the sister-in-law was given benefit of doubt. The Apex Court held that the charge against the accused under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code when is considered, it is in the circumstances when a person committed suicide, the person who abets commission of suicide shall be liable to be punished with imprisonment of over description for term which may extend to 10 years and fine. Chapter V of the Indian Penal Code is entitled “of abetment” and comprises of section 107 to 120, of which sections 107 and 108 are only required to be noticed. The Court discussed at length the said provisions and also the presumption under section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act to hold that the legislative intent is to curb the menace of dowry deaths with a firm hand. Such crimes are committed generally in privacy of residential homes and in secrecy. Independent and direct evidence is not easy to get. Therefore, the Legislature has introduced sections 113A and 113B of the Indian Evidence Act to strengthen the prosecution's hands by permitting presumption to be raised, if certain fundamental facts are established and unfortunate event has taken place within 07 years of marriage. This period of seven years is considered to be turbulent one after which the Legislature assumes that the couple would have settled down in life. This period of seven years is considered to be turbulent one after which the Legislature assumes that the couple would have settled down in life. If the married woman is subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his family member, section 498A of the Indian Penal Code would be attracted. If such cruelty or harassment was inflicted by the husband or his relative for, in connection with, demand for dowry immediately preceding death, by burns and bodily injury or in abnormal circumstances, within 07 years of marriage, such husband or relative is deemed to have caused her death and is liable to be punished under section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. In a situation where the husband or his relative, by his willful conduct creates a situation, which he knows would drive a woman to commit suicide and she actually does so, the case would fall within the ambit of section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. 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. “5. These observations were made with reference to an authority which could be described as characteristically administrative. At page 630 it was observed : "It is true that the order is administrative in character, but even an administrative order which involves civil consequences as already stated, must be made consistently with the rules of natural justice after informing the first respondent of the case of the State, the evidence in support thereof and after giving an opportunity to the first respondent of being heard and meeting or explaining the evidence." The case and the English in re H.K. (An infant) were specifically referred to with approval in a decision of the constitutional Bench of this Court in A.K. Karipak and others, etc. v. Union of India and others. (1970) 1 S.C.C. 457." 6. v. Union of India and others. (1970) 1 S.C.C. 457." 6. The decision of this Court in M. Narasimachari's case (supra) on which strong reliance has been placed on behalf of the appellants is of no assistance to them as the point as to whether an opportunity to show cause was to be afforded to a Government servant before applying a cut in his pension in view of the principle of natural justice embodied in the well-known maxim audi alteram partem was never urged or gone into in that case, Furthermore as pointed out by Palekar, J., while speaking for the Court in K.R. Erry and Sobhag Rai Mehta's case (supra) the question whether pension is a bounty or property did not arise in the former case. The present case is, in our opinion, fully covered by the judgment of this Court in K.R. Erry and Sobhag Raj Mehta's case. 7. For the foregoing reasons we are of the view that the impugned judgments do not suffer from any illegality and were rightly rendered. 8. In the result the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed with costs.” 24. In the case of Rotesh Kumar vs. State of Haryana reported in 2013(14) SCC 434 , it was a criminal trial based on circumstantial evidence. The case was of murder of wife in her hostel room during separation while petition for divorce by mutual consent was pending. The appellant had last seen the deceased in her hostel room and appellant had been staying as an insider nearby her guest house under fictitious name and address. The Court held that the motive of appellant to murder was established and his conduct in post commission of crime and circumstances of the case is to apply for the appreciation of evidence in the criminal trial. The Apex Court held that the credibility of eyewitness is very vital. The material omissions and discrepancy are only to be considered. The Court must read evidence and scrutinize the evidence, more particularly, keeping in view the deficiencies, drawbacks and infirmities pointed out in the evidence as a whole and evaluate them to find out whether it is against general tenor of evidence given by witnesses and whether earlier evaluation of evidence is shaken so as to render it unworthy of belief. The Court must read evidence and scrutinize the evidence, more particularly, keeping in view the deficiencies, drawbacks and infirmities pointed out in the evidence as a whole and evaluate them to find out whether it is against general tenor of evidence given by witnesses and whether earlier evaluation of evidence is shaken so as to render it unworthy of belief. It is emphasized by the Apex Court that the court is not supposed to give undue importance to omissions, contradictions and discrepancies, which do not go to the heart of the matter and shake the basic version of prosecution witness. “Last seen together theory: 24. In cases where the accused was last seen with the deceased victim (last seen-together theory) just before the incident, it becomes the duty of the accused to explain the circumstances under which the death of the victim occurred. (Vide: Nika Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh, AIR 1972 SC 2077 ; and Ganeshlal v. State of Maharashtra, (1992) 3 SCC 106 ).” 25. In the case of Saheb Rao and another vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2006(9) SCC 794 , the Apex Court while dealing with the case of dowry death found that the harassment and cruelty were meted out to the deceased while demanding more dowry from her parents. There was direct and reasonable nexus of commission of suicide by the deceased with the act of cruelty to which the deceased was subjected to by the accused appellant. The Court sustained the conviction of appellant under section 306 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code. 1. Relevant paragraphs are reproduced as under:- “14. In Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana this Court observed: (SCC p. 318, para 18) “… cruelty or harassment need not be physical. Even mental torture in a given case would be a case of cruelty and harassment within the meaning of Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. Explanation (a) to Section 498-A itself refers to both mental and physical cruelty. … Again wilful conduct means, conduct wilfully done; this may be inferred by direct or indirect evidence which could be construed to be such. Explanation (a) to Section 498-A itself refers to both mental and physical cruelty. … Again wilful conduct means, conduct wilfully done; this may be inferred by direct or indirect evidence which could be construed to be such. … A girl dreams of great days ahead with hope and aspiration when entering into a marriage, and if from the very next day the husband starts taunting her for not bringing dowry and calling her ugly, there cannot be greater mental torture, harassment or cruelty for any bride.” 15. In Gananath Pattnaik v. State of Orissa this Court specifically mentioned: (SCC p. 622, para 7) “7. The concept of cruelty and its effect varies from individual to individual, also depending upon the social and economic status to which such person belongs. ‘Cruelty’ for the purposes of constituting the offence under the aforesaid section need not be physical. Even mental torture or abnormal behaviour may amount to cruelty and harassment in a given case.” 16. In Mohd. Hoshan v. State of A.P. it was pointed out that: ` SCC p. 418, para 6) “The impact of complaints, accusations or taunts on a person amounting to cruelty depends on various factors like the sensitivity of the individual victim concerned, the social background, the environment, education, etc. Further, mental cruelty varies from person to person depending on the intensity of sensitivity and the degree of courage or endurance to withstand such mental cruelty.” 17. The complainant (PW 1) has deposed that soon after the performance of marriage, A-2 demanded a tape recorder. This statement is corroborated by PW 3 and PW 4. PW 3 has deposed that when PW 4 along with him went to Village Babulkheda 2-3 days after the marriage of his sister, A-1 demanded an additional amount of Rs 10,000 and A-2 demanded a tape recorder. This found support from the statements of PW 1 and PW 4 without any variation. Further PW 1 in his evidence has specifically said that the deceased had told him that the accused persons on account of the non-fulfilment of their demands, troubled her. There is evidence on record of PW 1 that when his daughter came back to his place she started weeping and told the complainant about the harassment inflicted upon her on account of non-payment of Rs 10,000. This found support in the statements of PW 3 and PW 4. There is evidence on record of PW 1 that when his daughter came back to his place she started weeping and told the complainant about the harassment inflicted upon her on account of non-payment of Rs 10,000. This found support in the statements of PW 3 and PW 4. The evidence shows that even the demand was made through the younger brother Mansub when he went to the place of the complainant. PW 1 has further mentioned that in the end of jaistha month, he went to Village Babulkheda to see his daughter and was insulted by the accused persons for not fulfilling their demand and they asked him to take her back to Village Pathri. It is said by PW 1 that just 8 days before the incident when the deceased last visited her maiden home she told him that she was beaten and also showed marks of beating on her body. She was weeping and requested him not to send her back to Village Babulkheda without satisfying the demand of the accused persons. The evidence clearly establishes that the accused persons were consistent in their demand regarding additional amount of Rs 10,000 even after their initial demand of tape recorder was fulfilled. The evidence clearly establishes that the deceased was harassed at her matrimonial home and her staying there had become miserable. The deceased on several occasions, within a short span of four months of her marriage, informed her father that she was being troubled by her husband and his elder brother. They also insulted and taunted her father in her presence and asked PW 1 to take her back to his home for his inability to fulfil their unlawful demand. The reluctance shown by the deceased to go to her matrimonial home within a short period of her marriage is indicative of the fact of the treatment given to her. At her matrimonial home, she was harassed and constantly nagged for non-payment of additional amount by her father. The facts clearly establish that the husband and his elder brother subjected the deceased to cruelty and their conviction under Section 498-A IPC is based on cogent reliable evidence. 18. The appellants were also convicted under Section 306 IPC with the aid of the presumption as to the abetment of suicide by a married woman under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act, 1872. 18. The appellants were also convicted under Section 306 IPC with the aid of the presumption as to the abetment of suicide by a married woman under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act, 1872. It is proved by the prosecution that Sangita committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband and his elder brother subjected her to cruelty. On the basis of the evidence, it can be said that the cruel treatment meted out to the deceased was of such a nature that it has driven the lady to commit suicide. 19. In Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh (SCC pp. 629-30, para 22) this Court held as under: “22. Sections 498-A and 306 IPC are independent and constitute different offences. Though, depending on the facts and circumstances of an individual case, subjecting a woman to cruelty may amount to an offence under Section 498-A and may also, if a course of conduct amounting to cruelty is established leaving no other option for the woman except to commit suicide, amount to abetment to commit suicide.” 20. Similarly, in Hans Raj v. State of Haryana (SCC pp. 263-64, para 13) this Court opined that: “Under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act, the prosecution has first to establish that the woman concerned committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband (in this case) had subjected her to cruelty. Even if these facts are established the court is not bound to presume that the suicide had been abetted by her husband. Section 113-A gives a discretion to the court to raise such a presumption, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, which means that where the allegation is of cruelty it must consider the nature of cruelty to which the woman was subjected, having regard to the meaning of the word ‘cruelty’ in Section 498-A IPC. The mere fact that a woman committed suicide within seven years of her marriage and that she had been subjected to cruelty by her husband, does not automatically give rise to the presumption that the suicide had been abetted by her husband. The court is required to look into all the other circumstances of the case. The mere fact that a woman committed suicide within seven years of her marriage and that she had been subjected to cruelty by her husband, does not automatically give rise to the presumption that the suicide had been abetted by her husband. The court is required to look into all the other circumstances of the case. One of the circumstances which has to be considered by the court is whether the alleged cruelty was of such nature as was likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health of the woman.” 21. Neither any evidence was led by the defence nor from the evidence placed on record by the prosecution, we can draw a plausible, reasonable and trustworthy explanation to rebut the presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act. The prosecution has sufficiently proved by cogent evidence that the accused-appellants by a series of acts and conduct created such a difficult and hostile environment for the deceased that she was compelled to commit suicide. In the light of the discussion in regard to the cruelty committed by the accused persons on the deceased under Section 498-A IPC, there is a direct and reasonable nexus of the commission of suicide by the deceased with the act of cruelty to which the deceased was subjected to by the accused-appellants. For the aforesaid reasons, we are of the view that the High Court has rightly upheld the conviction of the accused-appellants under Section 306 and Section 498-A IPC and we do not find any good or sufficient reason to take a different view of the matter. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.” 26. In yet another decision of Brijlal vs. Premchand reported in AIR 1989 SC 1661 , the husband used to demand money from deceased wife. He also quarreled with her over the payment of money. On a fateful day, the deceased reacted by saying that she preferred death to life in this world. The accused said that she can provide her relief by dying on the very same day. She set fire to herself immediately thereafter. This was held to be an instigation to the deceased for committing the suicide. The Apex Court quashed and set aside the order of acquittal of the High Court and held that in the circumstances, the accused had instigated the deceased to commit suicide. She set fire to herself immediately thereafter. This was held to be an instigation to the deceased for committing the suicide. The Apex Court quashed and set aside the order of acquittal of the High Court and held that in the circumstances, the accused had instigated the deceased to commit suicide. He would be guilty under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The Apex Court held “person can abate the commission of offence in any one of the three ways set out in section 107. The case of the accused would squarely fall under the first category viz., instigating the person to do a thing. In such circumstances, need to invoke Explanation 2 does not arise. Therefore, the order of the High Court acquitting the accused on the basis of imaginary promises would be liable to be set aside.” 27. Plethora of judgments, which have been discussed hereinabove shall need to be regarded while considering as to whether, the prosecution succeeded in proving the requisite ingredients of sections 498A read with section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. As held by the Apex Court in the case of Brijlal (supra) to combat the evil of dowry and suicidal death, the Legislature introduced section 113A and 113B of the Indian Evidence Act and section 498A and section 304B in the Indian Evidence Act. Section 113A permits presumption to the Court that the commission of suicide by woman has been abetted by her husband or relation if two factors are present. Firstly that the woman had committed suicide within a period of 07 years of her marriage and secondly that the husband or relation had subjected her to cruelty. This was a need felt by the Legislature to provide for additional provisions in the Indian Evidence Act for checking growing menace of the dowry death. This Court shall need to regard as to whether the abetment of commission of suicide in the fact and circumstances of the case was due to instigation and whether the same would be squarely covering the ingredients of section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. 28. Before this Court examines the oral as well as documentary evidence, which has come on the record, it would be apt to refer to the powers of the appellate Court in the appeal. 28. Before this Court examines the oral as well as documentary evidence, which has come on the record, it would be apt to refer to the powers of the appellate Court in the appeal. It is trite that in an appeal against the acquittal even if there are two views possible, the acquittal should not be disturbed very lightly. However, if the evidence pointed out to only one view that girl's version to her close relations contained taunting and harassment by the husband or his relations has resulted into instigating the suicide, the Court will be right in interfering with the acquittal. 29. It is also eloquently established and held in the decision of Gurbachan Singh vs. Satpal Singh(supra) that If there are two different conclusions possible by the very set of facts in appeal against acquittal, ordinarily no interference is desirable, but when from the very piece of evidence, if two views are not at all possible, then the Court would be right in interfering and that has to be judged in all circumstances by the Judge by the logic of the facts found in the background of law 1. `Reproduction of relevant paragraphs from the decisions of Gurbachan Singh vs. Satpal Singh are as under: “41. It has been urged by referring to the decision in Brij Lal v. Prem Chand. (1989) 3 JT 1 : ( AIR 1989 SC 1661 ) that where two views could reasonably be taken the appellate Court should not interfere with the order of acquittal made by the trial Court. 42. In the instant case on a proper consideration and weighing of the evidences the only reasonable view that can be taken is that the cruel behaviour and constant taunts and harassment caused by the accused persons while Ravinder Kaur, deceased was in her in-laws' house instigated her to commit suicide and in our considered opinion no other reasonable view follows from a proper consideration and appraisement of the evidences on record. As such the decision cited above is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case.” 30. In yet another decision of State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Rajkumar, 2018(2) SCC 69 , in criminal trial based on circumstantial evidence the Court has held as to what could be the approach during the appreciation of evidence of the witnesses. As such the decision cited above is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case.” 30. In yet another decision of State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Rajkumar, 2018(2) SCC 69 , in criminal trial based on circumstantial evidence the Court has held as to what could be the approach during the appreciation of evidence of the witnesses. While summarizing the principles, the Apex Court held that the approach must be, whether the evidence of witnesses, read as a whole, appears to be truthful in the given circumstances of the case. Once that impression is formed, it is necessary for the Court to scrutinize the evidence, more particularly, keeping in view the draw-backs and infirmities pointed out in the evidence and evaluate them to find out whether it is against the general tenor of prosecution's case. Before the Apex Court, there was a murder trial where the son of the deceased residing with her and the respondent accused in the same house and a natural witness spoke about the occurrence. The Court held that the evidence of son of the deceased P.W.No.1 was cogent and natural and was consistent with the prosecution's case. Therefore, the High Court was not right in doubting the evidence of son on the ground of alleged improvement made by him and rejecting his evidence on the premise that there were certain improvements. The Court further held that the failure of accused to explain incriminating circumstances against him also would have an effect under section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act. If the accused does not throw light on the facts, which is within his knowledge, his failure to offer any explanation would be a strong militating circumstance against him. In the matter before the Apex Court the deceased was last seen alive in the company of respondent accused and he did not satisfactorily explain the missing of the deceased. The same was drawn as militating circumstance held against the accused. It was held that it was for him to explain how deceased died. The accused had no reasonable explanation as to how body of the deceased was found hanging from the tree. Therefore, the conviction of the respondent under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was restored. The vital would be to refer to the paragraphs 16 and 17 hereinafter. “16. The accused had no reasonable explanation as to how body of the deceased was found hanging from the tree. Therefore, the conviction of the respondent under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was restored. The vital would be to refer to the paragraphs 16 and 17 hereinafter. “16. As pointed out by the Sessions Judge, deceased Meena Devi was last seen alive in the company of accused Raj Kumar and the accused did not satisfactorily explain the missing of deceased Meena Devi and the same is a strong militating circumstance against the accused. Meena Devi who was residing in the same house with the accused and was last seen alive with the accused, it is for him to explain how the deceased died. The accused has no reasonable explanation as to how the body of Meena Devi was found hanging from the tree. As held in Kashi Ram case, it is for the accused to explain as to what happened to the deceased. If the accused does not throw light on the fact which is within his knowledge, his failure to offer any explanation would be a strong militating circumstance against him. 17. As pointed out earlier, in his questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused simply denied the evidence of incriminating circumstance put to him and pleaded that he is innocent. A feeble attempt was made by the defence to suggest that the deceased consumed poison and committed suicide. Viscera of deceased Meena Devi was sent to FSL Tungand. As per FSL report, no poison was detected in the viscera of the deceased. In our considered view, the trial court rightly rejected the plea suggested by the defence.” 31. It would be important to refer to the testimonies of four witnesses viz. P.W.No.1, P.W.No.2, P.W.No.8 and P.W.No.10 and 11 here. The mother of the deceased Hasumatiben Kirtibhai Patel.P.W.No.1, at her deposition at Exh.No.12 in Sessions Case No.38 of 2017, has stated that she has been living at Vastral, Ahmedabad. She had two children Krupa and Arpit and the daughter Krupa, after her 10th Standard had been engaged to accused Dhaval Udaybhai, who also had been doing the business of Electronic Wiring contract. The daughter got married on 21.01.2016. The other accused No.2 was brother-in-law of the deceased. P.W.Nos.3 and 4 respectively are father-in-law and mother-in-law. She had two children Krupa and Arpit and the daughter Krupa, after her 10th Standard had been engaged to accused Dhaval Udaybhai, who also had been doing the business of Electronic Wiring contract. The daughter got married on 21.01.2016. The other accused No.2 was brother-in-law of the deceased. P.W.Nos.3 and 4 respectively are father-in-law and mother-in-law. They had given the dowry as could be afforded by them and thereafter for one month she was treated well. According to her, the daughter had complained against of her in-laws and also son-in-law beating her and also giving her mental cruelty. Because of this, the daughter fell ill on 05.06.2016 and son-inlaw had chosen to leave her at home. She was taken to Bhakti Maternity Hospital at national highway on 06.06.2016 for treatment. The Doctor had diagnosed sharp reduction in hemoglobin. She was treated there for about a month and then she was sent back to the inlaws. According to her, the daughter was very reluctant to join and she was persuaded by her and her family. After she returned to her in-laws, once again because of the household work, her not knowing stitching and for dowry, the cruelty was perpetrated. It is her grievance that on 13.06.2016, the son-in-law i.e. accused No.1 had left his home and had gone away to his friend. He was persuaded to return home and daughter had confided in the family that the physical and mental cruelty continued. On 17.08.2016 since it was Rakshabandhan, she had gone to her parents and along with him her husband also had joined. She was under a great mental stress and there she reiterated her complaint of mental and physical harassment and cruelty by her in-laws. This witness had stated further that on 10.09.2016, at around 10:00 O'Clock, while she and her husband both were at home, accused No.3, father-in-law had called, who had said that Krupa, their daughter, is taken to a clinic near Bhagwati Marriage Hall, because she was not opening her mouth. When she left with her husband and the son for clinic in about 10 minutes, once again a phone call came and said that she was being taken to Civil Hospital. Therefore, they went with her brother-in-law and sister-in-law Mukeshbhai and Jyotsnaben to Civil Hospital where she was in the Trauma ward and was found dead. When she left with her husband and the son for clinic in about 10 minutes, once again a phone call came and said that she was being taken to Civil Hospital. Therefore, they went with her brother-in-law and sister-in-law Mukeshbhai and Jyotsnaben to Civil Hospital where she was in the Trauma ward and was found dead. It was conveyed to them that she had committed suicide at her in-laws’ place. 32. She, agreed in the cross-examination that nowhere in the complaint she had made a mention of, she having been beaten physically to which she agreed and further added that it was a physical and mental harassment. In her complaint, she has not stated of the demand of dowry. She had denied in the cross-examination that all her talk of mental, physical harassment and cruelty by the in-laws and other details of reduction in hemoglobin etc. was concocted. She also denied of not speaking truth with regard to the cruelty of not knowing household work and stitching work so also in relation to the dowry. It appears that she agreed to her having gone with the in-laws of Krupa with her husband and at Haridhwar and this was between 02.06.2016 to 07.06.2016. The also stayed at Anand Dham Seva Trust at Haridhwar and they returned on 08.06.2016 to Ahmedabad. She denied the suggestion that on 25.05.2016, the daughter was taken to Dr. Harsha Panchal for her Gynec problem. She also denied suggestion that prior to her marriage, she had issues concerning the Gynecologist. Further, It is denied that the same had been suppressed and the daughter was married. They had not given any complaint to the police prior to the said incident. She agreed that during the marriage time father-in-law of Krupa helped them in arranging for decorations and for other preparations of marriage. She denied specifically and categorically that on account of her physical problem, particularly relating to gynecology issues, she has committed suicide and only to blame the in-laws, concocted complaint has been lodged. Along with deposition of other witnesses, appreciation of evidence of this witnesses shall be made. 33. It will be worthwhile to refer to the deposition of P.W.No.2 Kirtibhai Madhavbhai Patel, father of the deceased and husband of P.W.No.1, who has been working in Umiya estate in Kalpesh Foundry and Engineering. He has virtually reiterated what his wife has stated in her deposition. 33. It will be worthwhile to refer to the deposition of P.W.No.2 Kirtibhai Madhavbhai Patel, father of the deceased and husband of P.W.No.1, who has been working in Umiya estate in Kalpesh Foundry and Engineering. He has virtually reiterated what his wife has stated in her deposition. According to him, in June, 2016, the daughter had fallen ill and on 05.06.2016, son-in-law Dhaval had left her at their place. She was admitted to Bhakti Maternity Hospital and the Doctor had opined that she had 4% of hemoglobin. For two months, her treatment continued and thereafter, percentage of Hemoglobin had reached the level of 10%. They had called up their son-in-law ,Dhaval Kumaraccused No.3 and Krupa was persuaded to join him. He also has stated in his examination-in-chief that on 13.06.2016, Dhaval had left his own place and he was brought back by his parents and other elders after much persuasion. Krupa had confided this in her parents and she had stated that Dhaval refused to be in the same house where she was. He had also conveyed to them that if she would be at her in-law's place, he was not willing to continue living with her. 34. According to him, on Rakshabhandhan day, he had left her to the parents. When they asked him to join for dinner, he had refused. The next day, she left for her matrimonial home. According to him, the in-laws had complained of less dowry and her not knowing household work so also stitching work. For the incident of 10.09.2016, he also has stated how initially they had not stated correct facts of her not having committed suicide and later on came to know about the same. 35. He has been also cross-examined at length. He denied of having concocted entire story of reduction in hemoglobin and the ill treatment given by the parents of Dhaval. He also agreed of having gone with the in-laws of Krupa to Haridhwar from 02.06.2016 to 07.06.2016. He agreed that on 25.05.2016 she was taken to Dr. Harsha Panchal at Shyam Hospital for her gynecology problem. He denied specifically that because of the gynecology problem, she was terribly upset and unhappy and, therefore, had chosen to commit suicide. 36. P.W.No.3 Shri Indravadan Bhikhabhai Patel resides at House No.28 in Mangaltirth society, which is next house to the residence of P.W.No.2. Harsha Panchal at Shyam Hospital for her gynecology problem. He denied specifically that because of the gynecology problem, she was terribly upset and unhappy and, therefore, had chosen to commit suicide. 36. P.W.No.3 Shri Indravadan Bhikhabhai Patel resides at House No.28 in Mangaltirth society, which is next house to the residence of P.W.No.2. He, being a neighbour, is aware of the details as he shares very good terms with the family of P.W.No.2. He knows about internal bickering because of the parents of deceased had confided with him. He too was present when P.w.Nos.1 and 2 had visited Civil Hospital. This witness did not know the in-laws of Krupa personally and he denied that because he being a neighbor of P.W.Nos.2 and 1, he had chosen to state incorrect facts. This witness shared very good terms with the family of P.W.No.2. He though denied of having stated all these details merely to help P.W.No.2. 37. Brother of the deceased has also been examined by the prosecution, who is P.W.No.8. He is 19 years of age and was pursuing diploma course at Ahmedabad. According to him, his sister was treated well by her in-laws for about a month and thereafter, she was denied basic dignity and was treated inhumanly by her in-laws. They had complained of her not knowing household work and not knowing stitching work and the parents not providing with sufficient dowry. Because of the taunting and ill treatment on the part of the in-laws, she had fallen sick and on 05.06.2016, his brother-in-law had left her at their home. On 06.06.2016, he had taken his sister to Bhakti Maternity Home, Rabari Colony and Sonography was done where the Doctor had diagnosed a sharp reduction in hemoglobin level, which was at 4%. Thereafter, she had given the treatment and after about a month, the blood report was normal and, therefore, the husband of hers had taken her back. She was also persuaded by the parents to join her in-laws. He further stated on 13.08.2016 while his sister was with in-laws, her husband had left home and had joined his friend at Himmatnagar. He was much persuaded to be brought back. His sister whenever came to her parents had complained of mental harassment and the cruelty. 38. She was also persuaded by the parents to join her in-laws. He further stated on 13.08.2016 while his sister was with in-laws, her husband had left home and had joined his friend at Himmatnagar. He was much persuaded to be brought back. His sister whenever came to her parents had complained of mental harassment and the cruelty. 38. This witness has also further stated of the incident on 17.08.2016 which was the day of Rakshabandhan and on that day also the sister had confided in him that still the physical and mental harassment has continued. She had joined her in-laws on 18.08.2016 when her husband had taken her back to her matrimonial home. The details of the incident of 10.09.2016 of initial statement of incorrect facts by father-in-law and thereafter their having gone to the Civil Hospital has been also stated by this witness in detail, which may not need further reiteration. So far as cross-examination of this witness is concerned, he has been extensively cross-examined. He agreed that on 05.06.2016 when he agreed that on 01.06.2016 his sister had come home and not on 05.06.2016, he took his sister to Bhakti Maternity Home. He denied that on 25.05.2016 because of the gynecology issue, she was taken to the hospital of Dr.Harsha Panchal. He denied specifically that there was a suppression of gynecology problem, she had suffered prior to her marriage. 39. PW.No.9 Patel Dinesh Bhupatbhai is also the neighbour of P.W.No.2. He had no clue as to what had happened in 05 to 06 months time after the marriage of Krupa. However, he came to know on 10.09.2016 when Krupa died, he inquired from P.W.No.2 who was profusely crying that couple of time, she was sent back to parents, when she was unwell and was taken to the hospital and to the clinic. It was conveyed by him that she periodically came to home and complained of mental, physical harassment and cruelty because the in-laws were unhappy on account of her not knowing household work and stitching work and also for less amount of dowry. 40. This witness more or less was knowing about the details of in-laws through PW.No.2. He did not have any independent brush with those persons. 41. PW.No.10 is Arpita Arvindbhai Patel, who resides at House No.43 of Mangaltirth Society at Vastral, Ahmedabad. According to this witness, she is a close friend of Krupa. 40. This witness more or less was knowing about the details of in-laws through PW.No.2. He did not have any independent brush with those persons. 41. PW.No.10 is Arpita Arvindbhai Patel, who resides at House No.43 of Mangaltirth Society at Vastral, Ahmedabad. According to this witness, she is a close friend of Krupa. For about 1½ month, her friend was treated well by her in-laws. She was given quite much of dowry by the parents. On Rakshabandhan day, she had visited this girl in the afternoon. She had complained of the physical and mental torture on the part of her inlaws. They also had grudges for the household work and the stitching work. According to this witness, Krupa frequently spoke to her. She also further stated that in the sixth month of 2016, Krupa’s husband had left her at her parents’ home and it was Aprit, who had taken the sister to Bhakti Maternity Home. Medical Report at laboratory when was made, she had 4% of hemoglobin and after 02 months of treatment, she had 10% of hemoglobin. It was on 09.2016 at around 10:30 a.m, her mother had informed her about her suicide. There is no reason for this witness to favour the prosecution. It is always quite natural for the girls to confide in mother and in her close friends and she was one of them. She had been categorical about the complaints that her friend had made about her husband and in-laws and she also was aware that the husband of her friend had left her with her parents in a very short span of six months when she was unwell. PW -11 also is a friend of the deceased and her neighbor who on the similar line as this witness PW-10 has spoken of her having been confided by the deceased of in-laws taunting Krupa and harassment from her husband. 42. Cumulatively, if the evidence of all these witnesses are evaluated , it can be said without any hesitation that it leads to one single most fact that the deceased girl who was barely married for six months had complained to the parents of harassment by the in-laws and also the husband in particular. 42. Cumulatively, if the evidence of all these witnesses are evaluated , it can be said without any hesitation that it leads to one single most fact that the deceased girl who was barely married for six months had complained to the parents of harassment by the in-laws and also the husband in particular. The incidents are also detailed as to how the husband chose to leave the girl at a parental home even at the time when she was unwell and was required to be taken to the hospital by her brother. In the cross-examination, suggestions are made that she had medical issues relating to the field of gynaecology and the same has been suppressed, it hardly could be the reason for either harassing the girl or leaving her at parental home when she needed the support and warmth of her husband the most. Again, nothing is coming out on record to uphold the contention raised in the cross examination of any kind of suppression on the part of the parents of the girl in getting her married to the Respondent no.1. It appears that her hemoglobin level had reduced considerably either due to malnutrition or due to menstruation problem or because of any other reasons of viral infection or Dengue etc. as opined by the doctor performing the post mortem in his cross examination. Again, it is a matter of record that after she was treated well by the doctor at her Parental home that she had regained her level of hemoglobin up to 10%. Biological and hormonal changes after marriage are quite natural phenomena and they can precipitate some of the health related issues and as doctor had opined her getting menstruated twice a month could also be the reason of low level of hemoglobin and that can also happen due to weakness or for various reasons, but, that surely can never furnish the grounds to suspect something fishy in dealing. And that certainly cannot be the reason for ill treating any person, much less the wife who is legally wedded and who would also have the right to be accommodated and adjusted in the new environment. And that certainly cannot be the reason for ill treating any person, much less the wife who is legally wedded and who would also have the right to be accommodated and adjusted in the new environment. Thereafter also, it is quite clear from the evidence of the witnesses that the husband had left his home by impudently stating that he is not comfortable to live with the girl for no rhyme or reason and if she continued to be at her matrimonial home, he was unwilling to be under the very roof. After much persuasion he was brought back to his own home and started living with her. It may look a very insignificant event and it may also look that he had gone away on account of some dispute between the spouses and was brought back by the parents on persuasion. One must not forget that these were the formative months of a girl who had joined her in-laws and her husband in particular with all her dreams of future and she herself was made to feel unwanted at her matrimonial home by the husband himself. Against all odds and at a time when bonding of relationship is yet not very strong, it is expected that the husband would be supporting the newly wedded bride who comes leaving behind all her loved ones, in an environment which is totally new and at times alien for her. Again, it needs a mention here that this event took place after she was left to her own fate with sharp reduction of HB and when she returned from parental home after regaining her vitality and curing herself. Instead of making her feel welcome or having any remorse of his not having stood by her when she required him, this act could be a major blow and would surely amount to cruelty and harassment both on the part of the Respondent no.1. 43. Had it been a case where there was a possibility of two views to be taken from the oral as well as documentary evidence which has been adduced by the prosecution, the Appellate Court shall need to be slow in interfering. However, here all the close relatives namely parents and siblings to whom ordinarily the girl would confide in, have stated in no uncertain terms as to how attempts have been made by the husband to make her feel unwanted. However, here all the close relatives namely parents and siblings to whom ordinarily the girl would confide in, have stated in no uncertain terms as to how attempts have been made by the husband to make her feel unwanted. Assuming that the neighbour who has also supported the case of prosecution was confided the details by father of the deceased girl, her mother, father and brother all had first-hand information and likewise, her own friend also was aware of what was going on at a matrimonial home. The girl who is newly wedded and who also has hopes and aspirations from her own future cannot be expected to confide these details to anyone else but to the close family. This Court is also aware that in the month of June of the year when the girl died, both the parents had visited Haridwar with of course other cast members where both, the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the girl had also joined. Father-in-law also helped the family in making arrangements at wedding. This trip to Haridwar was an attempt of a goodwill gesture to mend the relationship which was already quite fragile. The possibility also cannot be ruled out that as the husband was not desirous of supporting the wife and he also was inimical towards her, the parents also were helpless against his insistence not to have the girl as his wife. This court requires to also notice further that at the time when the girl committed suicide,the parents of the boy have not stated correct facts and in fact, had misled the parents by stating that she had certain dental issue and was taken to the hospital. When they started from home, they were revealed that she was taken to trauma ward at civil Hospital. This Court deems it appropriate to give benefit of doubt to both Father and Mother in-laws and brother-in-law and does not hold this untruth against them because revealing the truth of death of daughter of Complainant over the telephone or in a crude manner could have resulted in shocking her parents enormously. It is to be recognised by the Court that role of parents and elderly persons in Indian milieu and particularly, in the lives of newly wedded couple is very important. It is to be recognised by the Court that role of parents and elderly persons in Indian milieu and particularly, in the lives of newly wedded couple is very important. They act as friends, philosophers and guides to the new generation and enrich their lives by their experiences and wisdom rather than thwarting their personal ambitions and desires or imposing their own set of conditioning in the lives of new generation. In laws of the deceased girl appear to have failed in performing such roles of guide and Philosopher in the lives of young married couple , however, that by itself may not make their acts criminal to interfere with the conclusion of giving the benefit of doubt to the Respondents no.2, 3 and 4. Again, absence of any details of physical beating or harassment qua these three in the in initial written versions, penned down by the IO, has weighed with this court in not interfering in their order of getting benefits of doubt of all the charges. 44. This court has also gone through oral evidence of Panch witnesses and of written panchnamas and also noted that largely tranche witnesses have chosen not to support the case of prosecution. This aspect by itself may not weaken the case of the prosecution when most of the written documents have been specified by the officer who investigated the case. There is hardly anything to doubt his credentials. 45. Dr.Bhavin Shah (PW-12) has performed Post mortem of the body of the deceased in panel with Dr.Vikas Tabhani and has confirmed the cause of death on account of suicide. Except ligature marks, there were no injury marks on the body and he confirmed that the same was committed anytime before 23.35 hours on 10/9/2016. He in his detailed cross examination has adhered to his initial version and also cleared couple of doubts in relation to reduction in hemoglobin level as referred to herein above. 46. PW-14 confirmed that he recorded the FIR after the initial enquiry into 71 of 2016 Accidental Death Case, which was lodged by mother of the deceased on 11 September 2016 and also confirmed that the FIR was lodged 22 hours late and there is no explanation as to why the complaint was made belatedly. 46. PW-14 confirmed that he recorded the FIR after the initial enquiry into 71 of 2016 Accidental Death Case, which was lodged by mother of the deceased on 11 September 2016 and also confirmed that the FIR was lodged 22 hours late and there is no explanation as to why the complaint was made belatedly. However, in the very breath, he confirms that there was already enquiry going on with regard to the Accidental Death case no.71 of 2016. He also confirmed that there is nothing in the complaint which is alleging that father-in-law, mother-in-law or brother-in- law had physically beaten the girl. Late filing of a FIR is no ground at all as accidental death enquiry was already going on. There are sufficient details available in the FIR as well as in subsequent versions which have been proved to hold that the ingredients of section 498 A of the IPC of harassment physical as well as mental to the bride who was married just before eight months, have been established without an iota of doubt. 47. PW- 15 , the Investigating officer has accepted in cross examination various omissions in the statements given by the close relatives like physical cruelty and demand of dowry by the in laws , however, no further discussion would be necessary as all the three Respondents No.2,3 and 4 are already given benefits of doubt. 48. Reference is needed at this stage of the sole defence witness Meenaben who is the neighbour of the respondents victims, accused who has spoken of her friendly terms with the deceased girl and her not having ever complained of the in-laws. She also attempted to state that she was being treated well by the in-laws. Her evidence does not inspire confidence as she has been the neighbour of the accused for a long time and in wake of the categorical evidence which has been given by the close relatives of the deceased there is no sanctity of such evidence. It is quite unlikely that in a short span of less than eight months, the girl would be so friendly with someone in the neighbourhood of her in-laws whom she would know to have shared good terms with her in-law’s family that she would confide her innermost feelings with her. It is quite unlikely that in a short span of less than eight months, the girl would be so friendly with someone in the neighbourhood of her in-laws whom she would know to have shared good terms with her in-law’s family that she would confide her innermost feelings with her. Such cruelty and harassment are always happening in privacy, Within the closed doors and neighbours are hardly privy to such inhuman happenings and unpalatable events suffered by the victims at the hands of husbands and in-laws. 49. So far as the question of abetment in commission of suicide is concerned, as discussed herein above, section 113A of the Evidence act permits this Court to presume if such harassment at the hands of the in-laws or the husband is sufficiently established by way of evidence that comes on the record, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case that the act of commission of suicide has been abetted by her husband, if the span of marriage is less than Seven years, cruelty here would have the same meaning as in Section 498A of the IPC. Considering all natural infirmities and drawbacks which can be found in the evidences of untutored genuine Prosecution witnesses, it can be held that the deliberate conduct of the husband was such which he knew was likely to drive his wife to the mental and physical injury or to drive her to the stage of no return. As discussed herein before, when the death of a married woman is caused in the circumstances which are otherwise than ordinary and natural within 7 years of her marriage, Section 113 A would be attracted, to hold the husband committing cruelty and harassment guilty for the offence under Section 306 of abetting the suicide. It is not necessary that just before the act of ending life that such act of cruelty must have happened, as Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 113 A is wide enough to cover the instances which are continuous and unabated. Death since has occured otherwise than under normal circumstances within 7 years of the marriage as a consequence of cruelty and harassment inflicted on victim for various reasons as detailed above, guilt of the husband is proved beyond all reasonable doubts and resultantly, the following order. OPERATIVE ORDER 50. Death since has occured otherwise than under normal circumstances within 7 years of the marriage as a consequence of cruelty and harassment inflicted on victim for various reasons as detailed above, guilt of the husband is proved beyond all reasonable doubts and resultantly, the following order. OPERATIVE ORDER 50. The Appeal preferred by the State of Gujarat being 437 of 2018 and Criminal Appeal No. 205 of 2018 Of the Complainant are partly allowed. Respondent No.1 in Criminal Appeal No. 437 of 2018 , Dhaval, the husband of the deceased is held guilty under section 306, 498A of the Indian Penal Code, whereas so far as the respondents No.2,3 and 4 are concerned who have been already given benefit of doubt by the trial Court, this Court does not choose to interfere with the order of giving benefit of doubt and therefore, qua them, these Appeals fail. 51. Considering the fact that respondent No.1 husband is not present today, he shall be kept present through the video conferencing for hearing both the sides on the aspect of punishment. 52. Learned Mr. Satapara makes a request of one day to enable respondent No.1 to remain present. Matter, for the said purpose is fixed on 17.06.2020 at 3:00 p.m. FURTHER ORDER 53. This Court had directed at the time of convicting respondent No.1 Mr. Dhavalkumar Updashbhai Patel of Criminal Appeal No.437 of 2018 to keep him present through the Video conferencing and as per the request of his Learned Advocate, this has been scheduled today. He is present on having been sent the link through his advocate and both the learned advocates Mr.Manoj T. Dhanak and Mr. Jagdhish Satapara representing this respondent also are present. Their submissions in relation to the punishment is that the applicant is a young boy and he also is the only son of their parents, which he later on corrected to urge that he has a sibling also. He works as an electric labourer and has no huge means. Moreover, he is completely innocent and, therefore, minimum sentence be awarded to the convict. 54. Mr.Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has urged the Court to pass the maximum sentence prescribed under the statute. He has urged that the nature of crime was such where the Court need not be lenient. The young age of person can hardly be a ground for the Court to act leniently. 55. Mr. 54. Mr.Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has urged the Court to pass the maximum sentence prescribed under the statute. He has urged that the nature of crime was such where the Court need not be lenient. The young age of person can hardly be a ground for the Court to act leniently. 55. Mr. A.N.Patel, learned advocate appearing for the complainant has urged that since the Court has already convicted respondent No.1, it may not leniently view the entire aspect and punish him for the maximum punishment. It is urged that the girl, who has lost the life was also very young. The conduct, so far, Of this convict and others was such that they have not chosen to even return the streedhan to the parents. He also has further urged to this Court that in a matter like this, no leniency should be shown. 56. Learned advocate Mr. Danak, in response to the request of streedhan and compensation, has urged that at no point of time before the trial Court, the complainant has made any request for the streedhan nor in the crossexamination, such aspect has emerged. It is now the improvised version and that must not be the ground for the Court to award the compensation. 57. Having thus heard both the sides and also having regard to the entire factual matrix, which has emerged coupled with the submissions made for sentencing this person, the Court cannot be oblivious to the fact that the girl, who has lost her life was also very young and was barely married to the present convict for the period of 08 months. She was the only girl child of her parents and parents have been struggling to come to terms with the void and vacuum caused on account of the act of the convict. Marriages do not require only marriageable age the statue prescribe, but also corresponding maturity and wisdom to handle physical, mental and emotional aspects of matrimonial relationship where two persons from absolutely different backgrounds start living together in a joint family where a very balanced role of the husband is inevitable which unfortunately was completely lacking in the Respondent convict. 58. Marriages do not require only marriageable age the statue prescribe, but also corresponding maturity and wisdom to handle physical, mental and emotional aspects of matrimonial relationship where two persons from absolutely different backgrounds start living together in a joint family where a very balanced role of the husband is inevitable which unfortunately was completely lacking in the Respondent convict. 58. Noticing, of course, the young age of the applicant also and bearing in mind the objective of bringing these provisions on the statute book for which respondent No.1 is convicted for, the Court deems it appropriate so far as offence under sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code is concerned to award him the maximum punishment of 03(three) years and the fine of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) and in default to undergo further three months of simple imprisonment. So far as offence under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, keeping in view the overall circumstances, it is found appropriate to award the punishment for the period of 07 (seven) years and fine of RS.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), in default, to under undergo simple imprisonment of 01 (one) year. Both the sentences shall run concurrently and the period, if he has undergone any, shall be treated as set off. 59. Without entering into the detail as to whether at any point of time, the streedhan of the deceased had been demanded by the parents or not, if the same has not been returned to the parents, let that be returned without loss of time and on the failure on the part of the respondent, the complainant can always take a legal recourse available with them. 60. So far as the aspect of compensation is concerned, the Court is conscious of the fact that there could be no compensation to the loss caused by the departure of daughter, young and vivacious. However, by way of a token, let the complainant know that the system has not forgotten her, it is being directed that the entire amount of fine shall be given by way of compensation to the parents of the deceased victim and additionally further amount of Rs.55,000/- (Rupees Fifty five thousand only) making it total Rs.01 lakh (Rupees one lakh only) shall need to be paid to the parents. The remaining amount of compensation, if not paid within four weeks, the same shall be recovered, as provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure for the fine to be recovered under section 57(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Such amount shall be deposited in the account of Complainant by the registry through the available and accepted banking channel. 61. Respondent No.1 since was already set free by the trial Court, he shall surrender before the Sessions Court without any further loss of time. 62. At this stage, learned advocate Mr. Satapara and learned advocate Mr. Danak for this respondent make a joint request to this Court that more time be made available for them to enable the respondent to approach the higher forum and, moreover, they shall also need to work out everything in the prevalent pandemic condition and, therefore, 12 (twelve) weeks time be granted. 63. The prosecution has left it to the Court's discretion to allow appropriate time for the purpose. 64. Considering the present crisis and also the possible difficulties in arranging for everything, the Court finds appropriate to accede to the request of granting 10 (ten) weeks time for the said purpose. He shall surrender at the end of 10 (ten) weeks, if by then, he had not preferred the appeal and has not obtained any favourable order, he shall surrender as directed above. on his failure to so do it, the warrant shall be issued against him by the trial Court for the same be executed by the police authority concerned. 65. Muddamal, if any, shall be returned to the trial Court and record and proceedings also shall be remitted back by the High Court Registry to the trial Court. 66. Appeals stand allowed to the extent above and are disposed of accordingly.