Kolkata: In a 1993 case of suicide committed by a wife allegedly due to torture by in-laws, the Calcutta High Court set aside the trial court judgement that convicted the late husband and the brother-in-law.
The instant appeal was preferred before the bench of Justice Partha Sarathi Sen by the husband and his brother challenging the 1993 conviction by the trial court. The husband was convicted under two IPC Sections 498A (cruelty against married woman) and 306 (abetment of suicide) and sentenced to 3.5 years of rigorous imprisonment with fine. His brother was only convicted for cruelty but he was sentenced to only fine and no imprisonment. However, during the pendency of the appeal, the husband died in February 2018 and as such the instant appeal stood abated against him. The court issued a rule against his brother (Durjodhan) asking to show cause as to why his sentence shouldn’t be increased to the imprisonment as defined under 498A in case his appeal is disallowed.
In June 1993, the brother of the deceased wife lodged a police complaint stating that he learnt his sister consumed poison at her matrimonial home. On reaching there, he found her lying dead in the courtyard. It was alleged that after three years of marriage torture was inflicted upon her by the husband and in-laws.
Prosecution argued Durjodhan (brother-in-law) was falsely implicated. A prosecution witness admitted that she was mentally disturbed due to death of her two children which may have led to suicide. Autopsy surgeon found no external or internal injury on the deceased. Further, the trial court misconstrued the provision of Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act.
The court observed that none of the prosecution witnesses accused Durjodhan of driving his brother’s wife to commit suicide. The trial court failed to consider that the suicide occurred 20 years of her marriage. Hence, Section 113A Evidence Act cannot be attracted. Court set aside the conviction and acquitted the brother-in-law.