Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Suminbhai Jatrubhai Mahla on 30 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026
undefined
Reserved On : 01/04/2026
Pronounced On : 30/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 384 of 2012
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
SUMINBHAI JATRUBHAI MAHLA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ZUBIN F BHARDA(159) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
CAV JUDGMENT
1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dated 28.09.2011, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Navsari camp at Vansda, in Sessions Case No.48 of 2010, for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, the appellant - State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Code").
2. The prosecution case as unfolded during the trial before the trial Court is that the death of a deceased woman who had been living with her husband and in-laws for about seven years occurred at her matrimonial home. It is alleged that the accused persons, including her husband, used to Page 1 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined quarrel with her, beat her, and harass her by not providing proper food, and that the husband was also habituated to consuming liquor. The deceased had informed her parental family about this harassment, but was sent back with an assurance that she would not be ill-treated in future. Despite this, the harassment allegedly continued. On 09.10.2009, while the complainant was away for work, he received information from a villager that his daughter had sustained burn injuries and had been admitted to the hospital. Subsequently, she died due to the burn injuries, allegedly after being subjected to cruelty and harassment, which led her to commit suicide. The complaint with this regard was accordingly filed.
3. After investigation, sufficient prima facie evidence was found against the accused person/s and therefore charge- sheet was filed in the competent criminal Court. Since the offence alleged against the accused person/s was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court where it came to be registered as Sessions Case No.48 of 2010. The charge was framed against the accused person/s. The accused pleaded not guilty and came to be tried.
4. In order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has examined 11 witnesses and also produced 18 Page 2 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined documentary evidence before the Trial Court, which are described in the impugned judgment as under:
Oral Evidence Exhibit No. Witness Name No. 1 Sevantaben Pratapbhai Mahala 13 2 Sunitaben Arvindbhai Mahala 14 3 Lilaben Kishanbhai Mahala 15 4 Kantubhai Gansubhai Mahala 16 5 Somabhai Gansubhai Bhoya 17 Chhaniben Pannalal Yadav 6 18 (Complainant) 7 Hasmukhbhai Maganbhai Lad 20 8 Dr. Santoshkumar Haridas Adhikari 25 9 Dr. Arvindbhai Savubhai Chaudhary 31 10 Pannalal Shyamlal Yadav 34 11 Narendrakumar Nanjibhai Pargi 41 Page 3 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined Documentary Evidence Exhibit No. Document Description No. 1 Panchnama of the scene of the incident 9 Panchnama of the physical condition (of the 2 10 body) 3 Panchnama of articles seized from the scene 11 4 Inquest Panchnama 12 5 Complaint (FIR) 19 6 Police Yadi 22 7 Dying Declaration 23 8 P.M. Note (Post-Mortem Note) 26 9 Police Yadi 27 10 Dead body handing over letter 28 11 Treatment Certificate 32 12 Police Yadi 33 13 Office copy of the request report 36 14 List written for taking D.D. (Dying Declaration) 37 Page 4 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined Exhibit No. Document Description No. 15 F.S.L. Opinion 38 16 Opinion on visiting the scene of the crime 39 17 Letter from C.P.I. Navsari 42 18 Letter from Deputy Police Officer, Navsari 43
5. After hearing both the parties and after analysis of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused for the offences for which the charge was framed, by holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
6. Learned APP for the appellant - State has pointed out the facts of the case and having taken this Court through both, oral and documentary evidence, recorded before the learned trial Court, would submit that the learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in true sense and perspective; and that the trial Court has committed error in acquitting the accused. It is submitted that the learned trial Court ought not to have given much emphasis to the contradictions and/or omissions appearing in the evidence and ought to have given weightage to the dots that connect the accused with the offence in question. It is submitted that Page 5 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined the learned trial Court has erroneously come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. It is also submitted that the learned Judge ought to have seen that the evidence produced on record is reliable and believable and it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had committed an offence in question. It is, therefore, submitted that this Court may allow this appeal by appreciating the evidence led before the learned trial Court.
7. As against that, learned advocate for the respondent/s would support the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court and has submitted that the learned trial Court has not committed any error in acquitting the accused. The trial Court has taken possible view as the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the present appeal by confirming the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned trial Court.
8. In the aforesaid background, considering the oral as well as documentary evidence on record, independently and dispassionately and considering the impugned judgment and order of the trial Court, the following aspects weighed with the Court :
Page 6 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined 8.1. Upon perusal of the complaint produced at Exhibit 19, the complainant, being the mother of the deceased Sangeetaben, has stated that her daughter was subjected to continuous physical and mental cruelty by Accused No. 1 (husband), who was addicted to alcohol and used to assault her under its influence, as well as by Accused Nos. 2 and 3 (in-laws), who also quarrelled with her and deprived her of food. On 18.09.2009, the deceased returned to her parental home after being assaulted and driven out;
however, upon assurance by Accused No. 1 and his relative Kantubhai that she would not be harassed further, she was sent back. Prior to leaving, the deceased expressed that she would take her own life if subjected to further harassment. Thereafter, on 09.10.2009, the complainant was informed that her daughter had sustained burn injuries and had been admitted to Vansda Cottage Hospital. Upon inquiry, the deceased stated that on the previous night, her husband, under the influence of alcohol, had abused and driven her out, and that her in- laws had supported such conduct, due to which, being unable to bear the continued harassment, she poured kerosene on herself and set herself on fire. During treatment, after approximately three days, she succumbed to her injuries. At the time the police had recorded the complainant's statement, wherein the complainant had Page 7 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined stated that she would file a complaint if deemed appropriate. Thereafter, with regard to the maintenance of the deceased Sangeeta's two minor children, a settlement was arrived at in the presence of the Sarpanch of village Vangan, the Sarpanch of Jooj village, and other community leaders, and a written agreement to that effect was executed between the parties. However, the accused persons failed to comply with the terms of the said agreement. Thus, as the accused persons had, by subjecting the complainant's daughter to cruelty, abetted her to commit suicide, the complainant lodged the present complaint against the accused at Vansda Police Station on 22.07.2010.
8.2. When the victim, Sangeetaben, was taken to Vansda Hospital, she was treated by Dr. Arvindbhai Chaudhary, who has been examined at Exhibit 31. In his deposition, he stated that on 09.10.2009, while he was serving as a Medical Officer at Cottage Hospital, Vansda, at about 14:05 hours, the patient Sangeetaben was brought for treatment by her husband, Sumanbhai. Upon inquiry, the patient stated that she had poured kerosene over her body and set herself on fire. The doctor has further deposed that, as per the history given by the patient, she had sustained burn injuries due to pouring kerosene and Page 8 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined igniting herself, and that she had suffered approximately 85% to 86% burn injuries over her body. The said witness has further deposed that on 10.10.2009, at about 08:00 a.m., the patient was referred to Navsari Civil Hospital and was accordingly shifted there by ambulance. However, in the cross-examination, no material has emerged to show that Sangeetaben was taken to Civil Hospital, Navsari; on the contrary, it has come on record that she was taken to Civil Hospital, Valsad.
8.3. It also transpires that if the Yadi which is produced vide exhibit-22 is taken into consideration, the said Yadi was sent to the Executive Magistrate who has been examined as P.W.7 vide exhibit 20-Hasmukhbhai Lad and said yadi states that the patient is conscious and the same is stated to be signed by one person name Mr.A.R.Patel but the said person who has opined that the patient is conscious has not been examined. The said endorsement by Mr.A.R.Patel is also on 09.10.2009, below exhibit-22 and the timing that has been stated that the patient is conscious is stated to be 06.50 hours. If the dying declaration produced vide exhibit-23 is taken into consideration, the dying declaration had started at 18:50 hours and had ended at 19.30 hours. The said dying declaration also does not state that the Executive Page 9 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined Magistrate has after considering the opinion of the doctor and /or as per his own opinion, he has opined that the said patient is fit to give the dying declaration. In the cross-examination when the question was asked to the said Executive Magistrate, that who had opined that the patient was conscious below exhibit 22, he stated that he is not in a position to state the full name of the said person, but the name has been stated by the person who had signed the said endorsement and the said fact can only be stated by a doctor is the reply that the said Executive Magistrate has given.
8.4. The prosecution has thereafter examined Dr.Santoshkumar Adhikari as P.W.8 vide exhibit 25, he has conducted the postmortem. The postmortem report is produced vide exhibit-26. The cause of death was cardio- respiratory failure caused by 86 to 90 percent burn. 8.5. Thereafter, prosecution witness Somabhai Bhoya was examined at Exhibit 17. In his deposition on oath, he has stated that he knows the accused and that Accused Sumanbhai was married to Sangeeta. He further deposed that when he had gone to the place of incident upon learning about the occurrence, he saw that Sangeetaben had sustained approximately 95% burn injuries. He stated Page 10 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined that he had called for an ambulance and ensured that she was taken to the hospital for treatment. He has further stated that Sangeetaben was not in a condition to speak and had been kept on oxygen support in the hospital. He has also deposed that he had no knowledge as to how Sangeetaben had sustained such burn injuries. In cross- examination, the said witness has admitted that the deceased was of a sensitive nature and would easily feel hurt if anything was said to her. It has been stated that Sangeetaben was leading a harmonious matrimonial life with her husband, and that there was no discord between Sangeetaben and the accused. Thus, from the testimony of this witness, no incriminating evidence against the accused persons emerges.
8.6. The mother of the deceased Sangeetaben, namely the complainant, Chhaniben Yadav, has been examined at Exhibit 18. The mother of the deceased has stated that the said information was received by her from one Mansukhbhai, the said Mansukhbhai has not been examined by the prosecution. The said witness has also stated that he along with his daughter Premila had gone to the hospital and said daughter Premilaben has also not been examined by the prosecution. In her examination-in- chief on oath, she initially stated that the deceased Page 11 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined Sangeetaben was her daughter and that Sangeetaben was married to Accused No. 1, Sumanbhai. She has further deposed that Sangeetaben died due to burn injuries; however, she has stated that she is not aware as to how Sangeetaben sustained such burns. She has further deposed that when she visited the hospital, Sangeetaben had sustained extensive burn injuries. Thereafter, she stated that Sangeetaben had informed her that she had been subjected to harassment, including being deprived of food for three days, and that her mother-in-law had also quarreled with her. She further stated that Sangeetaben had told her that on the day of the incident, she had woken up at about 5:00 a.m. with the intention of going to her parental home along with her two children; however, her husband did not permit her to do so. She has also deposed that Sangeetaben remained alive in the hospital for about four days and thereafter succumbed to her injuries. After her death, the deceased was cremated in accordance with customary rites, and even after completion of the funeral ceremonies, the complainant did not initiate any proceedings. Thereafter, the complainant was declared hostile. In cross-examination, the complainant has made a material admission that the complaint was lodged due to financial difficulties. The prosecution has categorically stated that she had filed the complaint, she Page 12 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined has stated that though the incident had taken place on 09.10.2009 and the deceased expired on 13.10.2009, the complaint has been filed on 22.07.2010, only as the accused were not ready to pay the amount of maintenance, which was assured and promised by the accused. 8.7. The complainant's husband, witness Pannalal Yadav, has been examined at Exhibit 34. In his deposition, he has stated that Sangeetaben was facing difficulties with respect to food and sustenance, on account of which she sustained burn injuries. He has further stated that her mother-in-law and father-in-law used to trouble her regarding food; however, Accused No. 1, Somanbhai, used to treat Sangeetaben properly. He has also deposed that, in connection with the death of Sangeetaben, a complaint was submitted to the Mamlatdar, but no complaint was lodged before the police. Thus, from the testimony of this witness, no incriminating material against the accused emerges, and it is indicated that the husband of the deceased was treating her well. Thus, as this witness did not support the case of the prosecution, he was declared hostile.
8.8. The Executive Magistrate, Shri Hasmukhbhai Lad, who recorded the dying declaration of the deceased, has Page 13 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined been examined at Exhibit 20. In his examination-in-chief, he has deposed that upon ascertaining that the patient was conscious, he immediately interacted with her, stating that no time ought to be wasted. Upon being informed that the patient had regained consciousness, he commenced recording the dying declaration. He further stated that, as per the printed format, he put questions to the patient and recorded her answers accordingly as they were given. 8.9. The dying declaration of the deceased has been produced at Exhibit 23. In the dying declaration, the deceased stated that her husband used to quarrel with her daily under the influence of alcohol and would compel her to go to her parental home. She further stated that her father-in-law and mother-in-law also used to quarrel with her while under the influence of alcohol. She deposed that, being unable to bear such daily harassment, she was compelled to take the extreme step of self-immolation. 8.10. In cross-examination, the said witness has admitted that, prior to recording a dying declaration, it is customary to obtain an endorsement from a medical officer certifying whether the patient is in a fit mental and physical condition to give a statement. He has further stated that if such an endorsement is already present on the yadi, a Page 14 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined separate certification is not necessary. He has admitted that the PSO had obtained such an endorsement on Exhibit 22, and relying upon the same as a medical certification, he proceeded to record the dying declaration. He has further stated that his action was based upon the requisition at Exhibit 22. The witness has admitted that although Exhibit 22 bears the signature and endorsement of the doctor, the same does not contain the official seal or stamp of the hospital, nor does it mention the designation of the doctor beneath the signature. The witness has further admitted that, at the time of recording a dying declaration, it is necessary to obtain a certification from a medical expert regarding the mental and physical condition of the patient; however, despite being aware of this requirement, he did not obtain such certification in the present case.
8.11. Moreover, as per the deposition of Dr. Arvindbhai, the victim was referred to Navsari Civil Hospital on 09/10/2009 at about 20:00 hours and was sent there by ambulance. However, as per the dying declaration at Exhibit 23, the statement of the victim was recorded at Valsad at 19:30 hours on the same day, i.e., 09/10/2009. If the victim, Sangeetaben, was present at Vansda Hospital until 20:00 hours on that day, it remains unexplained as Page 15 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined to how her dying declaration could have been recorded at Valsad at 19:30 hours. No clarification in this regard has been provided by the prosecution. Thus, this fact makes the dying declaration suspicious.
8.12. The panchnama of the arrest of the accused and the panchnama of the place of occurrence have been produced on record. Upon perusal of the same, it appears that in the dying declaration at Exhibit 23, the victim has stated that she poured kerosene from a primus stove and set herself on fire; however, the panchnama does not disclose the presence of any such primus at the place of occurrence. As per the FSL report, it is stated that a smell of kerosene was emanating from a plastic container found at the scene. In view of this, the version given by the victim in the dying declaration regarding the use of a primus is not corroborated by the panchnama of the place of occurrence.
8.13. Further, no independent witnesses from the neighborhood have come forward to support the case of the complainant. Further, the father of the victim, Pannalal, has also not supported the case of the complainant, and the testimonies of the complainant and witness Pannalal are found to be contradictory.
Page 16 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined 8.14 The prosecution has also not been able to prove the person who had endorsed that the patient was conscious below exhibit 22. In view of the said fact, the dying declaration also cannot be taken into consideration to prove the case of the prosecution against the accused. 9.1 The evidence on record and the glaring omission on the prosecution as pointed out above leaves no room of doubt that the order passed by the trial Court is as per law. The trial Court has rightly held that there was no positive evidence on record to prove that the accused by way of the conduct or spoken words, overtly or covertly, actually aided and abetted or instigated the deceased in such a manner that it leaves no other option for the deceased but to commit suicide. In the present case, the prosecution has also not been able to prove the clear motive of the accused to commit offence of abatement. There is also no close connection between the accused's action and the deceased's choice to commit suicide. In view of the said fact, the prosecution has not been able to prove that the accused have stimulated the deceased to commit suicide.
9.2 The prosecution has not proved that there was a clear motive to commit the offence of abatement. The Page 17 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined prosecution has also not proved that the accused proceeded to encourage and/or irritate the deceased through words or insults and that the accused intended to urge the deceased to end it all by committing suicide. The prosecution has also not been able to prove the direct connection between the incitement and committal of suicide. The prosecution has also not been able to prove direct or indirect act of incitement to the commitment of suicide. The prosecution has also not been able to prove by accusation of harassment without any positive action on the part of the accused close to the time of occurrence that led and forced the deceased to commit suicide.
9.3 The present matter turns on whether the conduct attributed to the accused satisfies the legal threshold of abetment of suicide. Therefore, read as a whole, it can be said that mere occurrence of a suicide does not automatically trigger rigours of the Section. The penal consequences under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code arise when the prosecution is able to establish that the accused abetted and had a role in provoking or facilitating that suicide. Therefore, this twin test distinction is required to be borne in mind. 9.4 Abetment, as understood in criminal jurisprudence, is not a broad moral expression but a term of precise Page 18 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined statutory meaning. Section 107 IPC delineates its contours:
instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding. Each of these modes presupposes active involvement. The law does not punish omission except in some cases, it punishes intentional encouragement or positive facilitation of a prohibited act.
9.5 It is therefore not sufficient to show that the deceased was unhappy, distressed, or subjected to unpleasant treatment. The jurisprudence developed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently underscored that routine domestic disagreements, suspicion between spouses, or episodes of harassment do not ipso facto amount to instigation. Rigours of this Section intervene only where there is clear evidence of mens rea and a direct causal link between the accused's conduct and the decision of the deceased to commit suicide.
9.6 The concept of instigation demands something more than mere reproach or accusation. It connotes an active suggestion, an incitement, or conduct of such intensity that it operates upon the mind of the victim and pushes him or her toward this drastic and unfortunate step. The prosecution therefore, must demonstrate either a deliberate intention to drive the deceased to suicide or knowledge that the conduct in question was likely to produce that consequence. Equally Page 19 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined indispensable is the requirement of proximity. The law insists on a live and immediate nexus between the acts complained of and the suicide. A remote or generalized allegation is insufficient. There must be evidence showing that the accused engaged in conduct so closely connected in time and effect with the suicide that it can reasonably be said to have triggered the fatal act.
9.7 No material has been brought on record demonstrating any proximate act immediately preceding the suicide which could be construed as instigation. Nor is there evidence of a positive act amounting to intentional aid. The essential ingredients of abetment -namely, culpable mental state coupled with active or proximate conduct-are not established.
9.8 On an overall assessment of the evidence, the prosecution has failed to demonstrate the existence of the foundational elements necessary to sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC.
10. In the case of Mahendra K.C. v. State of Karnataka and another, [(2022) 2 SCC 129], it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the essence of abetment lies in instigating a person to do a thing or the intentional Page 20 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined doing of that thing by an act or illegal omission. 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. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.
10.1 In the case of Mahendra Awase v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2025 (1) Crimes 347 (SC), the observations are made with regard to abetment of suicide. It has been held that in order to bring a case within purview of Section 306 IPC, there must be a case of suicide and in commission of said offence, person who is said to have abetted commission of suicide must have played active role by act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate commission of suicide. It has been further observed that the act of abetment by person charged with said offence must be proved and established by prosecution before he could be convicted under Section 306 IPC. It is further observed that to satisfy requirement of instigation, accused by his act or omission or by a continued course of conduct should have created such Page 21 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined circumstances that deceased was left with no other option, except to commit suicide.
10.2 In the case of Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu versus State of West Bengal, (2010) 1 SCC 707, it has been held that in a case of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the deceased to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC would not be sustainable. 10.3 In the case of Rajesh v. State of Haryana, (2020) 15 SCC 359, after considering the provisions of Sections 306 and 107 of IPC, the Court held that conviction under Section 306 IPC is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide. 10.4 In the case of Amudha v. State, 2024 INSC 244, it was held that there has to be an act of incitement on the part of the accused proximate to the date on which the deceased committed suicide. The act attributed should not Page 22 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined only be proximate to the time of suicide but should also be of such a nature that the deceased was left with no alternative but to take the drastic step of committing suicide.
11. Further, learned APP is not in a position to show any evidence to take a contrary view in the matter or that the approach of the Court below is vitiated by some manifest illegality or that the decision is perverse or that the Court below has ignored the material evidence on record. In above view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Court below was completely justified in passing impugned judgment and order.
12. Considering the impugned judgment, the trial Court has recorded that there was no direct evidence connecting the accused with the incident and there are contradictions in the depositions of the prosecution witnesses. In absence of the direct evidence, it cannot be proved that the accused are involved in the offence. Further, the motive of the accused behind the incident is not established. The trial Court has rightly considered all the evidence on record and passed the impugned judgment. The trial Court has rightly evaluated the facts and the evidence on record.
13. It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal Page 23 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined appeal, the appellate court is not required to re-write the judgment or to give fresh reasoning, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper. Such principle is down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy, reported in AIR 1981 SC 1417 wherein it is held as under:
"... This court has observed in Girija
Nandini Devi V. Bigendra Nandini
Chaudhary (1967)1 SCR 93: (AIR 1967 SC
1124) that it is not the duty of the
appellate court when it agrees with the view of the trial court on the evidence to repeat the narration of the evidence or to reiterate the reasons given by the trial court expression of general agreement with the reasons given by the Court the decision of which is under appeal, will ordinarily suffice."
14. Thus, in case the appellate court agrees with the reasons and the opinion given by the lower court, then the discussion of evidence at length is not necessary.
15. In the case of Ram Kumar v. State of Haryana, reported in AIR 1995 SC 280, Supreme Court has held as under:
Page 24 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined "The powers of the High Court in an appeal from order of acquittal to reassess the evidence and reach its own conclusions under Sections 378 and 379, Cr.P.C. are as extensive as in any appeal against the order of conviction. But as a rule of prudence, it is desirable that the High Court should give proper weight and consideration to the view of the Trial Court with regard to the credibility of the witness, the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt and the slowness of appellate Court in justifying a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who had the advantage of seeing the witness. It is settled law that if the main grounds on which the lower Court has based its order acquitting the accused are reasonable and plausible, and the same cannot entirely and effectively be dislodged or demolished, the High Court should not disturb the order of acquittal."
16. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Singh & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2011) 11 SCC 444 and in the case of Page 25 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined Bhaiyamiyan Alias Jardar Khan and Another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2011) 6 SCC 394, while dealing with the judgment of acquittal, unless reasoning by the trial Court is found to be perverse, the acquittal cannot be upset. It is further observed that High Court's interference in such appeal in somewhat circumscribed and if the view taken by the trial Court is possible on the evidence, the High Court should stay its hands and not interfere in the matter in the belief that if it had been the trial Court, it might have taken a different view.
17. In the case of Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, reported in (2007) 4 SCC 415, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:
"42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:
(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
(2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on Page 26 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law.
(3) Various expressions, such as, "substantial and compelling reasons", "good and sufficient grounds", "very strong circumstances", "distorted conclusions", "glaring mistakes", etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of "flourishes of language" to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.
(4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused.
Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the Page 27 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.
(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court."
18. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in a recent decision, in the case of Constable 907 Surendra Singh and Another V/s State of Uttarakhand reported in (2025) 5 SCC 433, has held in paragraph 24 as under:
"24. It could thus be seen that it is a settled legal position that the interference with the finding of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Judge would be warranted by the High Court only if the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity; that the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record; and that no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record."Page 28 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/384/2012 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026 undefined
19. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the scope of appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 no case is made out to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
20. In view of above facts and circumstances of the case, on my careful re-appreciation of the entire evidence, I found that there is no infirmity or irregularity in the findings of fact recorded by learned trial Court and under the circumstances, the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondent/s - accused for the elaborate reasons stated in the impugned judgment and I also endorse the view/finding of the learned trial Court leading to the acquittal.
21. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Criminal Appeal fails and the same deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed, accordingly. Record & Proceedings be remitted to the concerned trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J) URIL RANA Page 29 of 29 Uploaded by URIL KRISHNAKUMAR RANA(HC01406) on Fri May 01 2026 Downloaded on : Sat May 02 05:09:50 IST 2026