Judgment : (Sachin Singh Rajput, J.) 1. This appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C .) has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and order of sentence dated 04.11.2003 passed by the learned 1 st Additional Sessions Judge, District Kanker, (C.G.) in Session Trial No. 460/2001 by which, learned trial Court held the appellants guilty of commission of offence and sentenced as described below - Conviction Sentence 1. U/s 306 IPC 07 year rigorous imprisonment with fine amount of Rs, 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for 6 months. 2. Appellant along with two other accused namely Durgapad Mandal and Saraswati Mandal faced the trial for an offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC . The admitted facts of this case is that the appellant is the husband, co-accused Durgapad Mandal and Saraswati Mandal are the parents-in-law of the deceased Smt. Teena Mandal. 3. Case of the prosecution in nutshell is that the deceased Smt. Teena Mandal committed suicide by hanging herself on 24.02.2001 at her resident at village P.V. 108 Police-Station – Pankhajur. Pw-7 Dileep Majumdar was informed by accused accused Durgapad Mandal upon which Pw-7 Dileep Majumdar informed about the incident to Police Post- Bande where merg intimation Ex. P/15 was registered and enquiry was set on motion. The dead body panchnnama of the deceased Smt. Teena Mandal was prepared vide Ex-P/7 in presence of witnesses. Autopsy of the dead body of the deceased was conducted by PW-1 Dr. M.S. Kanwar and gave the post mortem report Ex.P/2 that death of the deceased is due to cardiac respiratory failure and express the death to be suicide by hanging by a saree vide its enquiry report vide Ex. P/2. Statement of the witnesses during the merg enquiry, the fact came to the light that the deceased and the appellant having love marriage 8 moths prior to the incident. The parents of the appellant were not ready for the marriage and after the marriage of the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the appellant and the co-accused persons and she was also assaulted upon which the a meeting was also convened. During the course of investigation it was found that the deceased was subjected to cruelty in assault and as a result of which she committed suicide by hanging herself. During the course of investigation it was found that the deceased was subjected to cruelty in assault and as a result of which she committed suicide by hanging herself. After due investigation, the First Information Report under Section 306 of the IPC was registered and upon completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court. The case was committed to the Sessions Court who in turn made over to the trial Court for trial. 4. The appellant and the others co-accused were charged for an offence under Section 306 of the IPC who denied the charges and claimed to be tried. 5. The statement of the appellant and other co-accused under Section 313 of CrPC were recorded in which also they pleaded innocence and false implication. 6. Prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the accused persons examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 20 documents. 7. By the judgment impugned, the co-accused Durgapad Mandal and Saraswati Mandal were acquitted from all the charges whereas the appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated in the first paragraph of the judgment. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecution was unable to bring home the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. He submits that no admissible evidence is available against the appellant to hold him guilty under Section 306 of the IPC and the ingredient contained in Section 107 of the IPC have been fulfilled by the prosecution by way of clinching evidence. He submits that there is no evidence on record to suggest that the deceased Smt. Teena Mandal was subjected to cruelty and instigation which left no choice to her except to commit suicide. The allegation which appears from the record is with regard to some dispute between the husband and wife and some assault made by the appellant and the other co-accused. 9. According to the learned counsel for the appellant on the similar set of evidence, other co-accused Durgapad Mandal and Saraswati Mandal have been acquitted from the the charge in whereas appellant was convicted. Therefore, he submits in view of the material placed on record, the appeal deserves to be allowed and the appellant deserve to be acquitted from the charge. 10. Learned State counsel submits that the prosecution by way of prudent and cogent evidence clearly established the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, he submits in view of the material placed on record, the appeal deserves to be allowed and the appellant deserve to be acquitted from the charge. 10. Learned State counsel submits that the prosecution by way of prudent and cogent evidence clearly established the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt. He submits that the evidence of the prosecution clearly goes to show that the deceased Smt. Teena Mandal was subjected to cruelty and harassment and also assaulted by the appellant and which goes to show the instigation on the part of the appellant. The instigation was so severe that the deceased Smt. Teena Mandal was left with no choice except to commit suicide and no interference is warranted in the finding given by the trial Court. He further submits that in view of the allegations leveled against the appellant and the evidence collected, it is not a fit case to allow this appeal. Mr. Ankur Kasyap, therefore, prayed for the dismissal of this appeal 11. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. 12. The suicidal death of the death of the deceased Smt. Teena Mandal is not disputed by by any of the parties. Even otherwise, from the evidence of PW-1 Dr. M.S. Kanwar it is apparently proved on the record that the deceased Smt. Teena Mandal committed suicide by hanging resulting into her death. 13. This Court is required to see as to whether the prosecution was able to bring home the guilt of the appellant under Section 306 of the IPC beyond reasonable doubt. In order to appreciate the argument advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the provisions of section 107 & 306 of the IPC that fell for consideration are reproduced 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 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. 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 facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act. Section 306. Abetment of Suicide “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 not exceeding ten years, and shall also be liable to fine." 14 . Section 306 of the IPC has two basic ingredients-first, an act of suicide by one person and second, the abetment to the said act by another person(s). In order to sustain a charge under Section 306 of the IPC , it must necessarily be proved that the accused person has contributed to the suicide by the deceased by some direct or indirect act. To prove such contribution or involvement, one of the three conditions outlined in Section 107 of the IPC has to be satisfied. 15 . Section 306 read with Section 107 of IPC , has been interpreted, time and again, and its principles are well- established. To attract the offence of abetment to suicide, it is important to establish proof of direct or indirect acts of instigation or incitement of suicide by the accused, which must be in close proximity to the commission of suicide by the deceased. Such instigation or incitement should reveal a clear mens rea to abet the commission of suicide and should put the victim in such a position that he/she would have no other option but to commit suicide. 16 . It is, therefore, evident that the positive act of instigation is a crucial element of abetment. While dealing with an issue of a similar nature, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of C.G. reported in (2001) 9 SCC 618 laid down the parameters of what would be constituted to be an act of instigation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as follows: “20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". State of C.G. reported in (2001) 9 SCC 618 laid down the parameters of what would be constituted to be an act of instigation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as follows: “20. 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. The present one is not a case 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 been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.” 17 . It could thus be seen that Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do “an act”. It has been held that in order 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, however, a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. Applying the law to the facts of the case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court on to hold that a word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation. 18 . The Hon’ble Supreme Court in another case of Mariano Anto Bruno Anr Vs. The Inspector of Police reported in 2022 Live Law (SC) 834 , has held as under: “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 their 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.” 19 . Merely on the allegation of harassment without their 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.” 19 . It has been further held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is that “Each suicide is a personal tragedy that prematurely takes the life of an individual and has a continuing ripple effect, dramatically affecting the lives of families, friends and communities. However, the court of law while adjudicating is not to be guided by emotions of sentiments but the dictum is required to be based on analysis of facts and evidence on record.” 20 . Recently in case of Kashibai & Ors. Vs. The State of Karnataka reported in 2023 Live Law (SC) 149 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “Mere fact of commission of suicide by itself would not be sufficient for the court to raise the presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act, and to hold the accused guilty of Section 306 IPC .” 21 . It has been further held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is that “In order to convict a person for the offences under Section 306 IPC , the basic constituents of the offence namely where the death was suicidal and whether there was an abetment on the part of the accused as contemplated in Section 107 IPC have to be established. In order to bring the case within the purview of 'Abetment' under Section 107 IPC , there has to be an evidence with regard to the instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid on the part of the accused. For the purpose proving the charge under Section 306 IPC , also there has to be an evidence with regard to the positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid to drive a person to commit suicide. 22 . In case of Gangula Mohan Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh reported in ( 2010) 1 SCC 750 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court while interpreting Section 306 of IPC held as under: “Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. 23 . Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. 23 . It has been further held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that “In order to convict a person under section306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence.” 24 . Yet in an another case M. Mohan Vs. State represented by deputy superintendent of police reported in ( 2011) 3 SCC 626 , it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as under: “44. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. 45. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court are clear that in order to convict a person under Section 306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he/she committed suicide.” 25 . In light of the above authoritative pronouncement, the evidence brought on record in this case is to be seen. 26 . In order to sustain the conviction under Section 306 of the IPC , the learned trial Court basically relied upon the statement of the witnesses particularly PW-3 Satish Viswas, PW-5 Aseem Das, PW-8 Reena Majumda and PW-10 Smt. Amori Roy who have stated that there used to be quarrel amongst the appellant, co- accused person and the deceased. A meeting was also convened in which it was advised to the appellant not to assault to deceased. Considering this aspect to the matter, relying upon these witnesses, the learned trial court came to a conclusion that the deceased was subjected to assault (Maar-peet) after the marriage by the appellant and the other co-accused and therefore the case under Section 306 is made out. 27 . Statement of Pw-3 Satish Viswas would clearly indicate that the deceased Teena Mandal was assaulted by the appellant and few days prior to the incident, the appellant and the other co-accused assaulted the deceased for which a meeting was convened. 27 . Statement of Pw-3 Satish Viswas would clearly indicate that the deceased Teena Mandal was assaulted by the appellant and few days prior to the incident, the appellant and the other co-accused assaulted the deceased for which a meeting was convened. Appellant and the deceased were advised in the meeting where the Durgapad Mandal (acquitted accused) assured that they will keep the girl properly. In the cross-examination he deposed that there was a love marriage between the appellant and the deceased and for few days they were living happily and after sometime the domestic dispute used to take place. The deceased was pregnant by 4 months. He has further stated that she still in talking terms with the appellant and the acquitted accused persons. 28 . Pw-4 Sheebu Oberoy @ Shivpad Roy also deposed in examination-in-chief that before the death of deceased Teena Mandal, appellant Sushanto along with his mother used to assault her. A meeting was convened in which the mother of the appellant and Durgapad Mandal (acquitted accused) were advised not to assault the deceased. In cross-examination he deposed that the he has not seen the assault made by the appellant and co-accused persons. He deposed that there was some domestic dispute amongst the accused persons. He further deposed that the deceased has never informed about the assault made by her-in-laws. He further deposed that he himself never asked the deceased with regard to assault made by the accused persons. He further deposed that in the meeting it was advised that not to create domestic dispute amongst themselves and to live happily. 29 . Pw-5 Aseem Das has not supported the case of the prosecution and declared hostile by the prosecution. 30 . Pw-8 Reena Majumdar who happens to the head of the women society deposed that the deceased Teena Mandal made a complaint that her family members used to quarrel with her and thereafter compromise was entered into between them. This witness was declared hostile and on material particular does not support the case of the prosecution. 31 . From the statement of this witness it appears that deceased Teena Mandal came to her 3-4 months after marriage and a meeting was convened as there was a domestic dispute and they were advised to settle down the dispute. 32 . PW-9 Shanti Sarkar has not supported the case of the prosecution. 33 . 31 . From the statement of this witness it appears that deceased Teena Mandal came to her 3-4 months after marriage and a meeting was convened as there was a domestic dispute and they were advised to settle down the dispute. 32 . PW-9 Shanti Sarkar has not supported the case of the prosecution. 33 . PW-10 Amori Roy mother of the deceased deposed that the marriage between the deceased and the appellant took place 7-8 months prior, the parents of the appellant were not happy with the marriage and refused to offer food to the deceased and used to assault her. She leveled allegations that her daughter was subjected to cruelty. She also suggested that the meeting was also convened and despite of advise of the meeting the accused persons still used to beat the deceased. 34 . PW-11 Anand Sarkar and PW-12 Ranu were declared hostile. 35 . From assessment of these witnesses it appears that the marriage of the appellant and the deceased took place 7 months prior. It also appears that the deceased was being assaulted by the accused persons and therefore a meeting was convened and advise was given to them. The said allegation is against all the accused persons. The evidence of the witnesses also suggest that there was some domestic dispute between the accused persons and the deceased. The mother of the deceased PW-10 Amori Rai has tried to suggest that deceased was subjected to harassment which appears to have been stated on account of the feelings that she has lost her daughter. 36 . The prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the appellant under Section 306 of the IPC in light of the above judgment would require to show the a positive act to instigate or aid in committing suicide by deceased Teena Mandal. Domestic dispute between the spouses is a natural phenomena. There may be some evidence with regard to harassment and ipso facto would not lead to irresistible conclusion that the deceased was left with no choice to except to suicide. The allegations were leveled against all the accused persons and 2 co- accused have been acquitted. The learned trial Court gave a finding that there is no direct or indirect evidence of abetment against the acquitted accused. However, the allegation made by the witnesses appears to be similar against all the accused. The allegations were leveled against all the accused persons and 2 co- accused have been acquitted. The learned trial Court gave a finding that there is no direct or indirect evidence of abetment against the acquitted accused. However, the allegation made by the witnesses appears to be similar against all the accused. In this backdrop it would be apt to place reliance some decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme court. In case of Javed Shaukat Ali Qureshi Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2023) 9 SCC 9 Hon’ble Supreme Court held that “when there is similar or identical evidence of eye-witnesses against two accused by describing them same or similar role, Court cannot convict one accused and acquit other” and observed in paragraph No. 15 as under: “When there is similar or identical evidence of eyewitnesses against two accused by ascribing them the same or similar role, the Court cannot convict one accused and acquit the other. In such a case, the cases of both the accused will be governed by the principle of parity. This principle means that the Criminal Court should decide like cases alike, and in such cases, the Court cannot make a distinction between the two accused, which will amount to discrimination.” 37. Therefore, relying the judgment as stated above, this Court is of the opinion that ingredient of Section 107 of the IPC has not been fulfilled by the prosecution and benefit of doubt is extended to the appellant. 38 . In view of the above, the appeal is allowed and the appellant is acquitted from the charge. The impugned judgment is hereby set aside. Appellant is said to be on bail during pendency of the appeal. His bail bond shall be kept alive for six months as per provision of section 481 of BNSS, 2023. The record of the trial Court with copy of the judgment be sent back for information and compliance.