Shivram vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 779 of 2026
Shiv Ram …..Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. Thru. Prin.
Secy. Deptt. Of Home,
Lko
…..Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Nisha Srivastava, Preeti Devi

Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. – 27 AFR
Reserved On: 20.08.2026
Delivered On: 29.09.2026
HON’BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J.
1. Heard Smt. Nisha Srivastava, learned counsel for the accused-appellant,
and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present criminal appeal has been filed under Section 415(2) of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Section 374(2)
of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) against the judgment and order
dated 09.03.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Barabanki in
Sessions Trial No. 143 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime no. 414 of 2023,
Police Station Asandra, District Barabanki wherein the accused-appellant
has been convicted and sentenced under Section 306 Indian Penal Code,
1860 (hereinafter referred as IPC) for a period of seven years’ rigorous
imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in default of payment
of fine additional two months imprisonment.

Page No. 2 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
Prosecution Story in Nutshell:
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, Lallu, submitted a
written report on 15.09.2023 stating that, about 20 years ago, his sister
Ramdasa was married to Shivram, the accused-appellant, but they had no
children. He further stated that Shivram used to harass his sister on this
account and would tell her to hang herself or jump into the river and die,
and that he would not keep her in his house. He further stated that, due to
such harassment and at the insistence of Shivram, his sister committed
suicide by hanging herself on the intervening night of 09/10.09.2023. He
further stated that his sister had informed him about the harassment and the
threats to commit suicide, and that he had also counselled her.
4. On the basis of the written report, an FIR was registered on 15.09.2023
against the accused-appellant, Shivram, as case crime no. 414 of 2023,
under Section 306 IPC. The Investigating Officer conducted the
investigation and, after completion thereof, submitted a charge-sheet
against accused-appellant, Shivram, under Section 306 of IPC. Thereafter,
the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. The Sessions
Court framed charges against the appellant under Section 306 IPC. The
appellant denied the charges, pleaded not guilty, and claimed trial.
5. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined PW-1 Lallu, PW-2
Ram Manohar, PW-3 Mithilesh Kumari , PW-4 Seema Devi, PW-5 SI
Manoj Kumar Singh, PW-6 Ram Shukal, and PW-7 Dr. Swapnil Singh.

Page No. 3 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution produced and proved the
following documents, which were marked as exhibits:-
S.
No.
Ext. No. Particulars
1. Ext. Ka-1 Written Report
2. Ext. Ka-2 Copy of GD Entry No. 31
3. Ext. Ka-3 FIR
4. Ext. Ka-4 Copy of GD Entry No. 17
5. Ext. Ka-5 Panchayatnama
6. Ext. Ka-6 Challan Lash
7. Ext. Ka-7 Sketch of the dead body
4. Ext. Ka-8 Letter to RI
5. Ext. Ka-9 Letter to CMO
6. Ext. Ka-10 Sample Seal
7. Ext. Ka-11 Site Plan
8. Ext. Ka-12 Charge-Sheet
9. Ext. Ka-13 Post-Mortem Report
7. The statement of the accused-appellant was recorded under Section 313
Cr.P.C., wherein he denied the allegations levelled against him. He stated
that his wife had been suffering from tuberculosis for a long time and that
he had got her treated, but as she did not recover, she became depressed,
due to which she committed suicide.
Submissions made by learned counsel for the accused-appellant:
8. Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submits that the prosecution has
failed to establish the charge under Section 306 IPC beyond reasonable
doubt. It is further submitted that the evidence of the prosecution
witnesses, who are admittedly the close relatives of the deceased, is

Page No. 4 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
materially inconsistent and suffers from significant omissions, particularly
with regard to the alleged acts of harassment and the alleged incident
immediately preceding the occurrence. The alleged oral disclosures made
by the deceased have not been supported by any independent or
contemporaneous evidence, and the material circumstances emerging from
the testimony of the Investigating Officer do not corroborate the
prosecution version. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged delay
in lodging the FIR, coupled with the material omissions in the earliest
version, assumes significance in determining the reliability of the
subsequent allegations of harassment. It is further contended that even if
the allegations of matrimonial discord or harassment are accepted at their
highest, the same do not, in law, constitute abetment of suicide. Learned
counsel submits that the learned trial Court has failed to undertake this
essential statutory exercise and has not recorded any specific or reasoned
finding identifying the act by which the appellant allegedly abetted the
suicide. Reliance has been placed upon Prakash v. State of Maharashtra ,
AIR 2024 SC (Supp) 2300 , and Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of
Maharashtra , (2021) 2 SCC 427 , to contend that mere harassment,
matrimonial discord or even abusive conduct, without the requisite
intention, positive act and proximate nexus with the suicide, cannot sustain
a conviction under Section 306 IPC. It is thus submitted that the
prosecution has failed to prove the essential ingredients of the offence and
that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of doubt.

Page No. 5 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
Submissions made by learned A.G.A :
9. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the appeal and submitted that the
prosecution has proved the case against the accused-appellant beyond
reasonable doubt. It is argued that the consistent testimony of the
prosecution witnesses establishes that the deceased was subjected to
harassment and humiliation by the appellant on account of her
childlessness and physical condition and that, shortly before the
occurrence, she had disclosed the conduct of the appellant to her family
members. It is further submitted that the deceased died an unnatural death
by hanging within the matrimonial home and that the medical evidence
conclusively establishes the cause of death. Learned A.G.A. further
submits that the delay in lodging the FIR, in the facts and circumstances of
the case, is not sufficient to discredit the prosecution version and that the
learned trial Court, upon appreciation of the evidence on record, has
rightly convicted the accused-appellant. The appeal, therefore, deserves to
be dismissed and the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the
learned trial Court warrants no interference.
Oral Testimonies:
In order to appreciate the issues arising in the present appeal, it is appropriate to
examine, in brief, the oral evidence adduced by the prosecution.
10. PW-1, Lallu , complainant and brother of the deceased Ramdasa, deposed
that she had been married to the accused-appellant Shivaram for about 20
years. He further deposed that, on 09.09.2023, the accused-appellant first
informed him telephonically that the deceased was missing and thereafter
that she had died. He further deposed that, on 08.09.2023, the deceased

Page No. 6 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
had informed him over the telephone that the accused-appellant had beaten
and harassed her, taunted her for being childless and told her to commit
suicide by jumping into the river. He further deposed that, when she had
visited him on Raksha Bandhan, she had complained of continued violence
and harassment by the accused-appellant. On reaching her matrimonial
house, he found her dead body under a tree outside the house and
attributed her suicide to the harassment and taunts of the accused-
appellant. He proved the written, which was marked as Ext. Ka-1 and
deposed that the Investigating Officer recorded his statement and prepared
the site plan at his pointing out.
11. During cross-examination , he denied that the deceased was suffering
from tuberculosis or was being treated for the same, and deposed that he
had neither consulted any doctor regarding her infertility nor knew
whether the accused had done so. He further deposed that, about 10-12
years after marriage, the deceased had stayed at her parental home for
about one year after being beaten by the accused-appellant, whereafter she
was taken back by him. He further deposed that the accused-appellant had
never prevented the deceased from visiting her parental home and that
their family members were treated hospitably during their visits. He
further clarified that, although he had stated in examination-in-chief that he
found the deceased hanging from a tree, by the time he reached the spot,
the police had already brought the body down and it was lying on the
ground. He admitted that he had not mentioned in the written report or
stated to the police that the accused-appellant had first informed him that
the deceased was missing and thereafter about her death. He also admitted

Page No. 7 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
that, though he had stated that the deceased informed him on 08.09.2023
about being beaten by the accused-appellant, he had not disclosed this fact
to the police. He further deposed that the report was prepared with the
assistance of a person outside Police Station Asandra and was lodged on
the same day. He denied that the deceased suffered from tuberculosis,
depression or illness-related distress, or that the accused-appellant was
getting her treated. He further deposed that the deceased was physically
disabled in one leg. He denied that she had committed suicide on account
of her illness or that the accused-appellant had not subjected her to
violence. He also denied the suggestion that she had taken ornaments from
his house and that, on account of a dispute regarding their return, he had
falsely implicated the accused-appellant.
12. PW-2, Ram Manohar , deposed that the deceased belonged to village
Dhanoli and that her death occurred in village Bhediya. He further deposed
that the Inspector prepared the inquest report in his presence and recorded
his statement.
13. During cross-examination , he deposed that the deceased’ s family
members arrived at around 2:00 P.M., by which time the dead body had
been sealed and the inquest proceedings were completed. He further
deposed that the deceased was physically disabled in one leg and had been
ill for several days, for which the accused was getting her treated. He
further deposed that the police cut the cloth by which she had hanged
herself from the tree and took into possession a slipper, lota and rope. He
further deposed that his statement was not recorded by the police after
completion of the inquest proceedings. He denied that no inquest

Page No. 8 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
proceedings had taken place or that his signatures had been obtained on
blank papers.
14. PW-3, Seema Devi , sister-in-law ( ) of the deceased, deposed that the
भाभी
deceased had been married to the accused-appellant for about 20 years and
that they had no children. She further deposed that, on account thereof and
the deceased’s physical disability in one leg, the accused-appellant used to
taunt and beat her and tell her to die. She further deposed that the deceased
used to confide in her regarding such harassment and had again
complained of the same when she visited her parental home on Raksha
Bandhan. She further deposed that, after returning to her matrimonial
home, the deceased committed suicide about four or five days later, being
distressed by the accused-appellant’s conduct.
15. During cross-examination , she deposed that the deceased was not ill and
that she was unaware whether she had tuberculosis or had received any
treatment. She further deposed that information regarding the occurrence
was received at around 7:00 A.M. and that, by the time she reached the
spot, the dead body was lying on the ground and had not been sealed. She
further deposed that her husband thereafter went to lodge the report. She
further deposed that the last rites were performed by the accused-appellant,
who used to visit her house and with whom she had never had any dispute.
She further deposed that a panchayat had been held about 5-6 months prior
to the occurrence in her presence, attended by the village Pandit and
members of her community, while the accused-appellant had attended
alone. She further deposed that she had neither taken the deceased to any
doctor nor knew whether the accused-appellant had done so. She denied

Page No. 9 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
the suggestion that the deceased was not physically disabled, that she had
children, or that she had committed suicide on account of tuberculosis or
that a false complaint had been lodged to extort money from the accused-
appellant or that she was deposing falsely at the instance of her husband.
16. PW-4, Seema Devi , younger sister of the deceased, deposed that the
deceased had been married to the accused-appellant about 20 years prior to
the occurrence and had been residing at her matrimonial house for about
one year before the incident. She further deposed that the deceased was
physically disabled in one leg and had no children, on account of which
the accused-appellant used to harass her and ask her to leave the
matrimonial house. She further deposed that the deceased had, on several
occasions, stayed at her parental home and narrated such harassment to
her. She further deposed that, in September 2023, about 5-6 days after
Raksha Bandhan, the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself from
a chilwal tree at her matrimonial house. She also deposed that, a day prior
to the occurrence, the deceased had telephonically informed her that the
accused-appellant was harassing her and talking of bringing another wife,
causing her mental distress.
17. During cross-examination , she deposed that the deceased used to
frequently visit her house and that she had no ill-will towards the accused-
appellant. She further deposed that the deceased walked with the aid of a
stick due to disability in one leg. She further deposed that she was unaware
whether the deceased was suffering from tuberculosis or whether the
accused-appellant was getting her treated. She denied the suggestion that

Page No. 10 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
the deceased had committed suicide on account of her physical disability,
tuberculosis or childlessness.
18. PW-5, S.I. Manoj Kumar Singh , Police Station Asandra, District
Barabanki, deposed that, on 15.09.2023, while posted as office clerk, he
registered the FIR on the basis of the written report submitted by
complainant Lallu, as per his dictation. He further deposed that the
corresponding G.D. entry was made on the same day at around 14:52
hours as Entry No. 31, which was proved and marked as Ext. Ka-2, and
that the FIR was provided to the complainant after obtaining his signature.
The FIR was proved and marked as Ext. Ka-3.
19. During cross-examination , he deposed that the complainant had come
alone to the police station and that he had no prior information regarding
the incident or any knowledge of the date of occurrence. He further
deposed that the FIR was registered pursuant to the written order of the
S.H.O. and that he was unaware when the special report was dispatched.
He denied the suggestion that the FIR had been registered at an odd hour at
the instance of his superior officers.
20. PW-6, S.I. Ram Shukla , Investigating Officer, Police Lines, Ayodhya,
deposed that, on 10.09.2023, while posted at Police Station Asandra,
District Barabanki, he recorded the information furnished by the accused-
appellant in G.D. Entry No. 17 at around 11:21 hours and proceeded to the
place of occurrence for inquest. He deposed that he found the deceased
hanging from a tree and, with the help of villagers, brought the body down
and laid it on the ground. He thereafter completed the inquest, sealed the
body and sent it for post-mortem examination. He proved the relevant

Page No. 11 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
inquest documents, marked as Ext. Ka-4 to Ka-10. He further deposed that,
on 15.09.2023, on the basis of the written report of complainant Lallu,
Case Crime No. 414 of 2023 under Section 306 IPC was registered and on
18.09.2023, he recorded the complainant’s statement and prepared the site
plan at his pointing out, which was proved and marked as Ext. Ka-11, and
on 15.10.2023, arrested the accused-appellant. He proved the charge-sheet,
which was marked as Ext. Ka-12.
21. During cross-examination , he deposed that none of the villagers, at the
time of the inquest, informed him that the deceased had committed suicide
on account of harassment by the accused-appellant, and that the first
information regarding the incident had been given by the accused-
appellant. He further deposed that the accused-appellant, his family
members and the deceased’ s family members were present during the
inquest. He further deposed that the deceased was hanging from a tree by a
cloth, but no recovery memo regarding the cloth was prepared. He further
deposed that although investigation was entrusted to him on 15.09.2023 at
around 2:30-3:00 P.M., he did not commence investigation on that day. He
further deposed that the place where the body was found was around 200
metres from the accused-appellant’s house. He denied the suggestion that
he had submitted the charge-sheet without conducting any investigation
and merely on the basis of the statements of the witnesses.
22. PW-7, Dr. Swapnil Singh , Medical Officer, C.H.C. Ramnagar, District
Barabanki, deposed that, on 10.09.2023, he was posted as Medical Officer
at the said hospital and was assigned duty at the mortuary, Barabanki. He
further deposed that, on 10.09.2023, while posted at the said hospital and

Page No. 12 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
assigned duty at the mortuary, Barabanki, he conducted the post-mortem
examination of the deceased along with Dr. Sadanand, commencing at
around 4:05 P.M. and concluding at around 4:40 P.M. The dead body had
been brought by police personnel at around 12:30 P.M. He further deposed
that rigor mortis had passed off from both extremities, post-mortem
staining was present over the back and the nails were bluish. He further
deposed that the following ante-mortem injury was found on the body:
 Injury No. 1: An oblique ligature mark measuring 27 cm × 2 cm was present
around the neck, passing above the thyroid cartilage and running from front to
back in an upward direction. It extended along the mandibular line, leaving a gap
of 2.5 cm on the right side of the neck. The ligature mark was situated 3 cm below
the right ear and 5 cm below the left ear.
He further deposed that the internal organs were congested, the left
chamber of the heart was empty and the right chamber contained blood.
About 50 ml of semi-digested food was present in the stomach. Dr.
Sadanand found no internal or external genital injuries and no pregnancy.
He opined that death had occurred approximately half a day to one day
prior to the post-mortem examination and was due to asphyxia resulting
from ante-mortem hanging. The relevant biological samples were sealed
and handed over to the police. He proved the post-mortem report, which
was marked as Ext. Ka-13.
23. During cross-examination , he deposed that he was unaware that the
deceased was physically disabled in one leg. He further deposed that rigor
mortis usually commences about 5-6 hours after death, progresses from the
upper to the lower limbs over about 12 hours and thereafter subsides. He
further deposed that no injury, except the ligature mark around the neck,

Page No. 13 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
was found on the body of the deceased. He further deposed that the
deceased must have consumed food about two hours prior to her death.
Court Analysis:
Contradictory and Unreliable Testimony Regarding Harassment :
24.The allegation of harassment constitutes the principal factual foundation of
the prosecution case. The prosecution seeks to attribute the suicide of the
deceased to the conduct of the accused-appellant, alleging that, on account
of the couple having no children, the deceased was repeatedly taunted,
beaten and subjected to mental cruelty and was even exhorted to end her
life. On a careful and critical appraisal of the evidence, however, this
allegation does not attain the degree of certainty required in a criminal
trial. The material on record does not disclose a consistent,
contemporaneous and independently corroborated account of such
harassment, rather, the prosecution version has developed substantially
through statements of the deceased's close relatives, who admittedly were
not present in the matrimonial home at the time of the alleged acts of
harassment. The Court is, therefore, required to examine not merely
whether the witnesses have made allegations of cruelty, but whether their
testimony, viewed in its entirety and tested against the surrounding
circumstances, furnishes a trustworthy basis for concluding that the
accused-appellant subjected the deceased to the alleged harassment.
25.The most significant circumstance is that the allegation of continuous
harassment is not supported by any contemporaneous conduct or
circumstance emanating from the deceased during her lifetime. The
evidence shows that the deceased had been married to the appellant for

Page No. 14 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
approximately twenty years. PW-1 stated that she used to visit her parental
home and that the accused-appellant himself also visited the parental
house. He further admitted that he and his family members used to visit the
matrimonial home and, on family occasions, would stay there and were
treated with due hospitality. These circumstances are not by themselves
sufficient to rule out matrimonial cruelty, but they assume considerable
significance when the prosecution alleges a continuing course of grave
harassment extending over a long period. If the allegation is that the
deceased was being continuously subjected to violence and was repeatedly
being told to leave the matrimonial home or to end her life, the absence of
any contemporaneous complaint, letter, report, medical record or other
independent circumstance supporting such a continuing course of conduct
becomes a material factor in assessing the reliability of the subsequent
allegations.
26.Moreover, the prosecution has not presented a consistent account even as
to the immediate circumstances preceding the suicide. PW-1 alleged that
the deceased had spoken to him on 08.09.2023 regarding beating and
exhortation by the appellant to commit suicide. Yet, in cross-examination,
he admitted that this material fact had not been disclosed by him to the
police. This omission assumes importance because the alleged telephone
conversation was not a remote or incidental circumstance, according to the
prosecution itself, it was the immediate complaint made by the deceased
shortly before the occurrence and is relied upon to establish the appellant's
conduct proximate to the suicide. The subsequent introduction of such a

Page No. 15 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
material allegation, without its disclosure during the investigation,
necessarily affects the weight to be attached to the testimony.
27.The prosecution case is further weakened by the conduct of the parties
immediately after the occurrence. The Investigating Officer has
categorically stated that the information regarding the incident was first
given to the police by the accused-appellant himself. He further stated that,
at the time of the inquest proceedings, none of the villagers informed him
that the deceased had committed suicide on account of harassment caused
by the appellant. This is not being treated as substantive proof of
innocence, nevertheless, it is a relevant surrounding circumstance while
assessing whether the allegation of harassment was an established fact
existing from the inception or was subsequently brought forward after the
occurrence. The absence of any such allegation at the earliest stage,
despite the presence of the appellant, his family members and the
deceased's family members at the time of the inquest, creates a significant
gap in the prosecution narrative.
28.The evidence of the prosecution witnesses also does not disclose any clear
and consistent course of conduct which can safely be attributed to the
appellant. The allegations principally concern taunts on account of
childlessness, physical assault and threats to drive the deceased out of the
matrimonial home. Yet the witnesses do not furnish a consistent account of
any particular incident of assault, its date or circumstances, or any
independent occasion on which such conduct was observed by them. Their
evidence substantially proceeds on the basis that the deceased had narrated
such incidents to them. Such evidence cannot be discarded merely because

Page No. 16 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
the witnesses are relatives, nevertheless, where the allegation of cruelty is
sought to be established substantially through statements allegedly made
by the deceased to her relatives, the Court must examine whether those
statements are consistent with the surrounding circumstances and whether
the witnesses' subsequent conduct and earlier statements lend assurance to
their testimony. In the present case, the material omissions and
inconsistencies do not furnish such assurance.
29.The allegation of physical violence is also not corroborated by the medical
evidence. The post-mortem examination establishes that the deceased died
due to ante-mortem hanging, but no injury, except the ligature mark around
the neck, was found on her body. Thus, the medical evidence establishes
the cause and manner of death but does not support the allegation that the
deceased had been subjected to physical assault immediately preceding the
occurrence. Medical evidence is not invariably necessary to establish
cruelty or assault, but where the prosecution specifically relies upon
repeated beating as an important component of the alleged harassment, the
absence of any physical injury assumes relevance in the overall assessment
of the prosecution case.
30.Another circumstance which cannot be overlooked is the evidence
concerning the deceased's physical and medical condition. PW-2 stated
that the deceased had been ill for several days and that the accused-
appellant was getting her treated. PW-3 and PW-4, however, stated that
they were unaware of any such illness or treatment. The accused-appellant,
in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., furnished a specific explanation
that the deceased had been suffering from tuberculosis for a considerable

Page No. 17 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
period, that he had been getting her treated, and that, on account of her
illness and resultant depression, she had committed suicide. It is true that
the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. is not substantive evidence of the
defence version. Nevertheless, where the prosecution evidence itself leaves
the medical and mental condition of the deceased unexplained and
contains inconsistent accounts regarding the same, the defence explanation
cannot simply be brushed aside while determining whether the prosecution
has proved its own theory beyond reasonable doubt.
31.The learned Trial Court, while appreciating the evidence, appears to have
placed considerable reliance upon the statements of the deceased's
relatives regarding the alleged taunts, beating and mental harassment. In
my considered view, however, the evidence was required to be examined
cumulatively and not merely by counting the number of witnesses who
supported the prosecution version. The fact that more than one relative has
repeated the allegation does not, by itself, make the allegation reliable
where the source of their knowledge is substantially the deceased herself,
the material allegation of immediate harassment suffers from omission, no
contemporaneous complaint is forthcoming, the Investigating Officer
found no such allegation at the time of inquest, and the medical evidence
does not corroborate the allegation of physical assault.
32.It is also material that the deceased had admittedly been married for about
twenty years and had no children. The prosecution witnesses themselves
attribute the alleged harassment substantially to this circumstance. Yet, the
evidence does not satisfactorily establish what specific act or acts of the
appellant, immediately preceding the occurrence, converted the alleged

Page No. 18 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
matrimonial dissatisfaction into such grave harassment as would
reasonably explain the extreme step taken by the deceased. General
allegations of taunting or discord, without reliable evidence of the nature,
continuity and proximity of the alleged conduct, cannot be elevated into
proof of criminal harassment merely because the deceased subsequently
committed suicide. The Court must guard against drawing an inference of
culpability retrospectively from the tragic consequence of suicide.
33.Thus, the issue is not whether some matrimonial differences or
unhappiness may have existed between the deceased and the accused-
appellant. The question is whether the prosecution has proved, through
reliable and cogent evidence, the particular harassment attributed to the
accused-appellant and whether such evidence is sufficiently trustworthy to
constitute a safe foundation for a criminal conviction. On that touchstone,
the prosecution evidence falls short. The material omissions, the absence
of contemporaneous corroboration, the evidence of the Investigating
Officer regarding the absence of any allegation of harassment at the stage
of inquest, the lack of medical corroboration of the alleged beating, and the
inconsistent evidence concerning the surrounding circumstances
collectively create a reasonable doubt regarding the prosecution allegation.
34.In a criminal trial, the Court is not required to determine whether the
prosecution version is merely possible; it must be satisfied that the version
is proved beyond reasonable doubt. Where two views are reasonably
possible and the evidence does not permit the Court to safely distinguish
between them, the view favourable to the accused must prevail. In the
present case, the evidence regarding harassment is not of such sterling and

Page No. 19 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
consistent quality as could safely sustain a finding that the deceased was
subjected to the alleged cruelty by the appellant. The allegation, therefore,
remains unproved beyond reasonable doubt and the appellant is entitled to
the benefit of such doubt.
Unexplained Delay in Lodging the FIR :
35.The delay in lodging the FIR assumes significance in the present case not
merely because the report was lodged five days after the occurrence, but
because of the conduct of the informant in the intervening period.
According to the prosecution itself, PW-1 had spoken to the deceased on
08.09.2023, i.e. immediately before her death, and was allegedly informed
by her that the appellant had beaten her, taunted her regarding
childlessness and told her to die. If the deceased had indeed made such a
specific and immediate disclosure of cruelty to her brother, the natural
course would have been for the said circumstance to find place in the
earliest information furnished to the police after her death. Instead, PW-1
admitted that he had not disclosed this alleged incident of beating to the
Investigating Officer.
36.The conduct of PW-1 becomes still more significant in another respect. He
admitted that on 09.09.2023 the appellant himself had telephoned him and
informed him that the deceased was missing, yet this circumstance was
also not mentioned by him in the written report or disclosed to the
Investigating Officer. Thus, the person who subsequently came forward as
the informant had, according to his own testimony, received information
from both sides at or immediately before the occurrence, but neither the
alleged complaint of cruelty made by the deceased nor the appellant's

Page No. 20 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
communication regarding her disappearance was incorporated in the
earliest version.
37.This assumes importance because the FIR was ultimately lodged only on
15.09.2023, whereas the occurrence had taken place on the intervening
night of 09/10.09.2023. The issue, therefore, is not whether every delay in
lodging an FIR must necessarily lead to rejection of the prosecution case.
The question is whether, in the facts of the present case, the prosecution
has satisfactorily explained why allegations which are now projected as the
immediate cause of the deceased taking her life were not brought before
the police at the earliest opportunity. The evidence does not furnish a
convincing explanation for this intervening period.
38.Moreover, the omission cannot be viewed as an isolated defect in the FIR.
The alleged conversation of 08.09.2023 is sought to be relied upon as a
circumstance immediately preceding the suicide and, therefore, carries
considerable weight in the prosecution theory of abetment. Its absence
from the earliest version, despite PW-1 being the person who allegedly
received the disclosure, substantially diminishes its evidentiary value. The
subsequent introduction of such a specific allegation, after the lapse of
several days, therefore requires the Court to examine it with greater
caution.
39.The cumulative effect is that the prosecution has failed to satisfactorily
account for the transformation of an alleged domestic grievance known to
the informant before the occurrence into a specific criminal allegation after
the death. In a case under Section 306 IPC, where the prosecution is
required to establish a proximate and reliable nexus between the conduct

Page No. 21 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
attributed to the accused and the suicide, such unexplained delay, coupled
with the material omissions in the earliest version, becomes a relevant
circumstance creating doubt about the prosecution's subsequent
reconstruction of the events immediately preceding the death.
Absence of the Foundational Requirements of Abetment under Section 306
IPC :
40.The conviction of the appellant under Section 306 IPC cannot be sustained
merely upon proof that the deceased committed suicide. The statutory
offence is not one of causing or being responsible for a suicide in a general
or moral sense; the prosecution must establish the legally defined element
of abetment. Section 306 IPC is, therefore, necessarily required to be read
conjointly with Section 107 IPC. The existence of suicide is only the first
foundational fact. The second and indispensable requirement is that the
accused abetted the commission of such suicide, and such abetment must
fall within one of the three statutory modes contemplated by Section 107
IPC.
41.At the outset, it would be apposite to notice the statutory scheme of
Section 306 and Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, which is as follows:
“ 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. ”
“ 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. ”

Page No. 22 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
42.Thus, the statutory scheme itself makes it necessary for the Court to
identify the particular act or conduct of the accused which constitutes
either instigation, participation in a conspiracy accompanied by an act or
illegal omission in pursuance thereof, or intentional aid. Section 306
cannot be invoked by simply establishing that the deceased was subjected
to some form of harassment or that there existed matrimonial discord.
There must be a further judicial determination as to whether the proved
conduct answers the statutory definition of abetment under Section 107
IPC. The counsel for the accused-appellant relied on Prakash and Others
v. State of Maharashtra and Another , AIR 2024 SC (Supp) 2300 wherein
it has been reiterated that Section 306 has two basic ingredients - suicide
and abetment thereof - and that the latter must be established by proof of a
direct or indirect act falling within one of the three modes recognised by
Section 107 IPC.
43.The expression “ instigation ” occurring in Section 107 has received
authoritative consideration in a long line of decisions. In Ramesh Kumar
v. State of Chhattisgarh , (2001) 9 SCC 618 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court
explained that instigation means to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or
encourage the doing of an act. At the same time, the Court made it clear
that a mere utterance, particularly one made in anger or emotion, cannot
automatically be treated as instigation unless, from the circumstances, a
reasonable certainty of incitement to the consequence can be spelt out. The
relevant consideration is whether the accused, by his act, omission or
continued course of conduct, created such circumstances that the deceased

Page No. 23 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
was left with no other option except to commit suicide. This principle has
subsequently been consistently applied by the Supreme Court.
44.Similarly, in S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan , (2010) 12 SCC 190 ,
the Hon’ble Supreme Court emphasised that abetment involves a mental
process of instigating or intentionally aiding another person. A conviction
under Section 306 IPC, therefore, requires a positive act, coupled with the
requisite mens rea , and an active or direct act which led the deceased to
commit suicide, seeing no other option. The requirement of mens rea is not
a matter which can simply be presumed from the factum of suicide or from
the existence of strained relations between the accused and the deceased.
45.The requirement of proximity is equally fundamental. The act relied upon
as constituting instigation must have a proximate nexus with the suicide;
otherwise, the causal connection between the alleged conduct and the
ultimate act of suicide becomes too remote. In Prakash (supra), the
Hon’ble Supreme Court, after considering the earlier authorities, reiterated
that the alleged instigation or incitement must be in close proximity to the
commission of suicide, must disclose a clear mens rea to abet the
commission of suicide and must be of such a nature as to place the victim
in a situation where he or she perceives no other option but to commit
suicide. The Court further emphasised that an active, direct or indirect act
on the part of the accused is necessary.
46.The principle has particular relevance in the present case because the
prosecution seeks to derive abetment from allegations of matrimonial
harassment and certain alleged utterances of the appellant. The Court is,
therefore, required to go one step beyond asking whether there was

Page No. 24 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
matrimonial discord or whether the deceased was at some point subjected
to unpleasant treatment. The real question is whether the prosecution has
proved, beyond reasonable doubt, what precise act of the appellant
constituted instigation or intentional aid; whether that act was
accompanied by the requisite mens rea , whether it was proximate to the
suicide; and whether it had the character of an act which could reasonably
be said to have driven the deceased to the point of suicide leaving her with
no other option. Unless these questions are answered affirmatively on the
evidence, the statutory ingredients of Section 306 remain unfulfilled.
47.The distinction between harassment and abetment of suicide is not merely
semantic. Matrimonial life may involve discord, disagreements, allegations
of ill-treatment and even conduct which may be blameworthy in a social or
domestic sense. Such conduct does not automatically become abetment of
suicide. In State of W.B. v. Orilal Jaiswal , (1994) 1 SCC 73 , the Hon’ble
Supreme Court cautioned that the Court must carefully assess whether the
cruelty or conduct attributed to the accused actually induced the victim to
end her life, and that ordinary petulance, discord and differences in
domestic life cannot, without more, furnish the foundation for a conviction
under Section 306 IPC.
48.In the present case, when the evidence is tested against these statutory and
judicial requirements, a fundamental deficiency becomes apparent. The
prosecution evidence may be read as alleging that the accused-appellant
taunted the deceased on account of childlessness, subjected her to
harassment and, on certain occasions, told her to die. But the mere
existence of these allegations does not answer the statutory question of

Page No. 25 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
abetment. The prosecution was required to establish the nature, context,
immediacy and purpose of the alleged acts and, more importantly, to
establish that the accused-appellant possessed the requisite intention to
instigate or intentionally aid the deceased in committing suicide. The
evidence must disclose the transition from alleged matrimonial harassment
to legally cognisable abetment. That essential link cannot be supplied
merely by the fact that the deceased ultimately committed suicide.
49.The alleged utterances attributed to the appellant also require examination
in their factual setting rather than in isolation. An expression such as “ die ”
or “ go and die ”, even if proved to have been uttered, cannot invariably be
treated as an act of instigation. The Court must examine the surrounding
circumstances, the manner in which the words were uttered, the occasion,
the conduct preceding and following the utterance, its proximity to the
suicide, and whether the utterance, viewed objectively, was intended to
provoke or encourage the deceased to take her own life. Criminal law
makes it clear that the law does not treat every angry, abusive or
emotionally charged utterance as instigation within Section 107 IPC.
50.The Court is conscious that the mental state of a person who commits
suicide is complex and that no rigid formula can be prescribed for every
case. Nevertheless, this does not dilute the prosecution's burden to
establish the statutory ingredients of the offence. The question is not
whether the deceased may have been unhappy, distressed or aggrieved by
her matrimonial circumstances, the question is whether the prosecution has
proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant, by a positive and
intentional act falling within Section 107 IPC, instigated or intentionally

Page No. 26 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
aided the commission of suicide. On the evidence available, that essential
requirement has not been established.
51.Furthermore, the learned trial Court was required to determine not merely
whether the deceased had committed suicide or whether there were
allegations of harassment against the appellant, but whether the
prosecution had established the foundational ingredient of abetment as
contemplated by Section 306 read with Section 107 IPC. The judgment,
however, does not undertake the necessary exercise of identifying the
precise act of the appellant which, in the opinion of the trial Court,
constituted instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid, nor does it record a
reasoned finding regarding the requisite mens rea or the proximate nexus
between the alleged conduct and the suicide.
52.The omission is particularly material here because suicide is not
synonymous with abetment of suicide. The former establishes the
occurrence, the latter requires proof of the accused's legally culpable
participation in bringing about that occurrence. The trial Court, therefore,
could not legitimately stop at the fact that the deceased had died by suicide
and that witnesses had alleged harassment by the appellant. It was
incumbent upon it to determine whether the evidence established a positive
act of instigation or intentional aid, the necessary mens rea and the
proximate nexus required by the law. In the absence of such an exercise,
the finding of guilt under Section 306 IPC remains without the necessary
legal foundation.
53.Accordingly, once the evidence is examined not merely for the existence
of matrimonial discord but for the specific statutory ingredients of

Page No. 27 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
abetment, the prosecution case falls short of the standard required for
sustaining a conviction under Section 306 IPC. The learned trial Court,
having failed to separately examine these foundational requirements and
having not recorded a reasoned finding as to the particular act constituting
instigation, the requisite mens rea, the proximate nexus and the
applicability of any of the three modes of abetment under Section 107 IPC,
committed a fundamental error in law. The conviction, therefore, cannot be
sustained merely on the basis of the conclusion that the deceased was
subjected to harassment and thereafter committed suicide.
Conclusion :
54.Having considered the entire evidence on record in its totality, this Court
finds that the prosecution has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt
that the accused-appellant subjected the deceased to such conduct as would
constitute abetment of suicide within the meaning of Sections 306 and 107
IPC. The allegations of harassment, when tested against the material
omissions, contradictions, unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and the
absence of any reliable evidence demonstrating a positive act of
instigation, intentional aid, requisite mens rea or a proximate nexus
between the alleged conduct and the suicide, do not satisfy the essential
ingredients of the offence. The learned trial Court has also failed to
undertake the necessary statutory examination of abetment and has not
recorded a reasoned finding identifying the particular act of the appellant
which constituted instigation or intentional aid. Consequently, the
conviction of the appellant under Section 306 IPC cannot be sustained and
he is entitled to the benefit of reasonable doubt.

Page No. 28 of 28 Cr. App. No. 779 of 2026
55.Accordingly, I find that the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the
judgment and order of the trial court, convicting and sentencing the accused-
appellant, Shivram , under Section 306 IPC, is liable to be set aside .
56.Consequently, the present appeal is allowed . The accused-appellant,
Shivram, is hereby acquitted of all the charges levelled against him.
57.The appellant is stated to be in jail. He shall be released forthwith , if not
required to be detained in any other case, upon furnishing bonds in terms of
Section 437-A Cr.P.C. for his appearance before the higher court, as and
when required, which shall remain in force for the period prescribed by law.
58.Pending applications, if any, stands disposed of.
59.Let the lower court record, along with a copy of this judgment, be
transmitted to the court concerned forthwith for necessary compliance.
(Zafeer Ahmad, J.)
October 29,2026
Shahnaz
Digitally signed by :-
SHAHNAZ BANO
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,
Lucknow Bench