R.KUMARESAN vs STATE REP BY
- Court
- Madras High Court
CRL A No.164 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 05.11.2026
PRONOUNCED ON : 11.11.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
CRL A No. 164 of 2022
CNR: {HCMA010198902020}
R.Kumaresan,
S/o. Raja Gounder,
Rettipatti, Kurumampatti Village,
Edapadi Taluk, Salem District.
...Appellant/P.W.1/
De-facto complainant
Vs
1.State Rep by
Inspector of Police,
Edapadi Police Station, Salem District.
2.R.Venkatachalam,
S/o.Raja Gounder,
3.Palaniammal,
W/o.Raja Gounder,
Both 2 and 3 respondents are residing at
Rettipatti, Kurumampatti Village,
Edapadi Taluk, Salem District.
...Respondents
Prayer : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 372 of Criminal Procedure
Code, praying to call for the records in connection with the Judgment
dated 06.09.2019 made in S.C.No.324 of 2017 on the file of the learned
Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Salem and set aside the same.
For Appellant : Mr.C.Arun Kumar
__________
Page 1 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
For Respondents : Ms.Sharada Vivek (for R1)
Additional Public Prosecutor
Mr.N.Manoharan (for R2 and R3)
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the de facto complainant,
challenging the acquittal of accused/respondents 2 and 3, vide judgment
dated 06.09.2019 in S.C.No.324 of 2017 passed by the learned Sessions
Judge, Mahila Court, Salem. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per the ranking before the trial Court.
2 (i) It is the case of the prosecution that the de facto
st
complainant/PW1 [the father of the victim] was a lorry driver; that the 1
nd
accused was known to PW1, as he was also a lorry driver; that the 2
st st
accused is the mother of the 1 accused; that the marriage between the 1
accused and the victim was solemnized on 07.09.2014; that the victim
had consented to the marriage on condition that she should be permitted
to continue her studies as she was pursuing her M.Sc degree; that after
marriage, the accused suspected the character of the victim and did not
even buy a cell phone for her use; and that both the accused had
__________
Page 2 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
prevented the victim from attending college, refused to pay the college
fees, abused her in various ways and asked her to do the domestic work,
failing which, goaded her to ‘go and die’; as a result of this, on
04.07.2015 at about 8.30 p.m., the victim committed suicide by hanging.
(ii) PW1, the father of the victim, had lodged a complaint [Ex.P.1]
on 05.07.2015 and an FIR [Ex.P.12] was registered in Crime No.321 of
2015 under Section 174(3) Cr.P.C by PW13, the Sub-Inspector of Police
st
in the 1 respondent police station. PW14, the Deputy Superintendent of
Police, commenced the investigation, prepared the observation mahazar
[Ex.P9] and the rough sketch [Ex.P13]. An inquest was also conducted
by the Revenue Divisional Officer [PW11]. PW14 thereafter, handed
over the investigation to PW15, since PW14 came to the conclusion that
the suicide was not committed due to harassment on account of dowry
demand. PW15, the Inspector of Police, after examining all the witnesses,
obtained the report of the Revenue Divisional Officer [PW11] and the
postmortem certificate and filed the final report on 23.03.2017 against the
accused, for the offence under Section 306 IPC, before the learned
Judicial Magistrate No.2, Sankagiri, which was taken on file as PRC
No.22 of 2017.
__________
Page 3 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
(iii) On the appearance of the accused, the provisions of Section
207 Cr.P.C. were complied with. The case was committed to the Court of
Sessions and was made over to the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court,
Salem, for trial, which was taken on file as S.C.No.324 of 2017. The trial
Court framed the charge under Section 306 IPC as against the accused
and when questioned, the accused pleaded 'not guilty'.
(iv) To prove its case, the prosecution had examined 15 witnesses
as P.W.1 to P.W.15 and marked 16 exhibits as Ex.P1 to Ex.P16, besides 1
material object, viz., M.O.1. When the accused were questioned, u/s.313
Cr.P.C. on the incriminating circumstances appearing against them, they
denied the same. The accused neither examined any witness nor marked
any document on their side.
(v) The trial Court found that the prosecution had not established
that there was cruelty in connection with the dowry demand; that the
prosecution had also not established that the accused were guilty of
cruelty of any other kind which had driven the woman to commit suicide
__________
Page 4 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
and that therefore, the offence under Section 306 IPC was not made out;
and hence, acquitted both the accused. Aggrieved by the acquittal, the de
facto complainant has preferred the instant appeal.
3. Mr.C.Arun Kumar, the learned counsel for the appellant/ de facto
complainant would submit that the impugned judgment suffers from
perversity; that though the victim committed suicide within seven years
of her marriage, the trial Court had not drawn the presumption under
Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which is mandatory;
that the evidence of the witnesses, P.W.1 to P.W.4, would clearly reveal
that the victim was subjected to cruelty soon after the marriage and before
her death, as they refused to pay her college fees and also made her to do
domestic work; that P.W.1 and P.W.3, the parents of the victim have
clarified as to why they had not made any allegation in the complaint;
that the trial Court had not taken into account the said explanation; that
the sister of the deceased [P.W.4] had narrated the cruelty committed to
the deceased, including the fact that she was assaulted on a particular day,
when she wanted to go to college against the wishes of the accused; that
the accused had made a false statement to the Doctor [PW9], stating that
the victim had an accidental fall in the bathroom; that the accused,
__________
Page 5 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
therefore, had suppressed the events that took place immediately before
the occurrence; that the accused had not discharged their burden in terms
of Section 106 of the Evidence Act, and relied upon the Judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ramkishan Digambar Jadhav Vs. The State
2026 INSC 1187]
of Maharashtra [ , in support of his submission and
prayed for setting aside the judgment of acquittal and for the conviction
of the accused/respondents 2 and 3.
4(i). Mr.N.Manoharan, the learned counsel for the
accused/respondents 2 and 3, per contra , would submit that the cross-
examination of all the witnesses would reveal that the allegation of
cruelty and that the accused refused to pay the college fees to the victim
is an afterthought; that in the complaint, the father of the victim had
stated that there was no cruelty committed to the victim; that the
investigating officer admitted in his deposition that none of the witnesses,
had given the reasons, as to why they had changed their stand
subsequently; that the statement of P.W.2, friend of the victim, before the
Revenue Divisional Officer would show that she had not stated about the
alleged cruelty to the deceased; that the investigating officer had admitted
that the college authorities were not examined, during the investigation to
__________
Page 6 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
ascertain whether the allegation was true; that the evidence discloses that
the victim was going to college till she committed suicide; that in the
absence of any evidence to infer the requisite mens rea to constitute
abetment, the offence of Section 306 of the IPC would not be made out;
and that the evidence at best suggest that the victim was hypersensitive to
petty quarrels in a family, and relied upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Gurcharan Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in
2017 (1) SCC 433 , and the Judgments of this Court in Ayyappan Vs.
State reported in 2016 (4) MLJ (Cri) 460 and Jambu Vs. State reported
in 2022 (2) MLJ (Cri) 176, in support of his submissions.
(ii)The learned counsel also submitted that the trial Court had
elaborately considered the evidence on record; that the presumption of
innocence has been confirmed by the trial Court; that the judgment is not
perverse, warranting an interference in an appeal against acquittal; and
hence, prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
5. Heard Ms.Sharada Vivek, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
and perused the materials available on record.
6. As stated above, it is seen from the evidence that PW1 is the
__________
Page 7 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
father of the victim; PW2 is the friend of the victim; PW3 is the mother
of the victim; PW4 is the sister of the victim; PW5 is the brother of the
victim; PW6 is the grandmother of the victim and is a hearsay witness;
PW7 is related to the victim and had turned hostile; PW8, who is related
to PW1 also turned hostile; PW9 is the doctor who first examined the
deceased and made entries in the Accident Register [Ex.P2], and had also
given intimation [Ex.P3] to Inspector of Police. PW10 is the doctor who
had conducted the postmortem and had issued postmortem certificate
[Ex.P4]. He had opined that the deceased died of asphyxia due to
hanging; PW11 is the RDO, who conducted the inquest and gave her
report [Ex.P8]. PW12 is the Village Administrative Officer, who had
signed in the seizure mahazar [Ex.P10], and as a witness in the confession
statement of the accused. PW13 is the Sub-Inspector of Police who
registered the FIR. PW14 is the Deputy Superintendent of Police, who
conducted a part of the investigation and handed over the investigation to
PW15, the Inspector of Police, who, on completion of the investigation,
filed the final report against the accused.
7. The relatives of the victim, PW1 to PW8, were examined to
establish that the deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before her death.
__________
Page 8 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
As stated earlier, PW7 and PW8 turned hostile. PW6, the grandmother of
the victim is a hearsay witness and is of no avail to the prosecution. PW5
is the brother of the victim, who had stated that the deceased had
complained to him about the ill-treatment meted out by her mother-in-
nd
law, the 2 accused and that they prevented her from going to college.
PW4's evidence also corroborates the evidence of PW5 as regards the
complaint made by the deceased to them about the cruelty caused by the
accused.
8. PW4, in fact, refers to two incidents of cruelty as told by the
deceased to her, i.e., on one occasion the deceased had told her that the
gas knob was open and someone had deliberately done it to cause leakage
when she was at home and that the door was locked from outside.
Thereafter, when she knocked on the door, her father-in-law opened the
door. PW4 had stated that the deceased had told her that her mother-in-
nd
law/the 2 accused would have kept the gas knob open. But there is no
nd
evidence to suggest that the 2 accused in fact did so.
9. The second incident is that when the deceased came to her
mother's house, she complained to PW4 [sister] and PW3 [mother] that
__________
Page 9 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
the accused were refusing to pay the college fees and that PW3 consoled
her and asked her to be patient stating that the accused would pay the
fees. PW4 also would state that when the deceased was at the hospital,
st
the 1 accused was seen crying, stating that he had caused the death of the
deceased by beating her.
10. PW1, the father, would also state that the accused subjected the
deceased to harassment since they suspected her character; that they had
not properly fed her; and that they refused to pay her college fees and also
prevented the victim from attending college. PW3's evidence also
corroborates the evidence of PW1, PW4 and PW5.
11. Therefore, the question is whether the evidence of these
witnesses and PW2, who was a friend of the deceased, was correctly
appreciated by the trial Court while acquitting the respondents 2 and 3. In
the earliest version, PW1, the complainant, had stated that the accused
and the deceased were living happily; that they had not made any dowry
demand; that they had permitted the deceased to study M.Sc., in a
college; and that the deceased had never complained to him about either
the accused or the father-in-law of the deceased, at any point in time.
__________
Page 10 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
PW1 had admitted in the cross-examination of what he had stated in his
complaint, namely that the accused had never demanded dowry and was
taking care of the deceased properly. He would add that subsequently he
came to know from his other daughter, who was examined as PW4, that
the deceased was subjected to cruelty and therefore, he had sent another
complaint to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Coimbatore. However,
the said complaint was not marked by the prosecution. In fact, the
investigating officer, PW14, when questioned as to whether she asked the
witnesses as to why they changed their stand subsequently, she would
state that she did so and the witnesses did not give any explanation.
12. The RDO [PW11] in her report [Ex.P8] has observed that the
deceased was not subjected to any cruelty in connection with the dowry
demand. The witnesses, even in their deposition before the Court, have
uniformly stated that the victim was not subjected to cruelty on account
of dowry demand. Therefore, the question is whether the victim was
subjected to cruelty of any other kind that had driven her to commit
suicide.
13. The charge specifically states that the accused prevented the
deceased from going to college, refused to pay her college fees and also
__________
Page 11 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
did not purchase her a mobile phone, suspecting her character. The cross-
examination of PW1 would reveal that the deceased died while she was
pursuing her M.Sc. course. PW1 would state that the accused had paid the
first term fees and that he was not aware as to when the next term fees
was due to be paid. In fact, even according to him, when the deceased
complained that the accused were refusing to pay the fees, he had
consoled her by stating that the accused may not have had the money to
pay the fees. PW14, the investigating officer, would admit that no
investigation was conducted to ascertain whether the accused delayed the
payment of the tuition fees. PW2, her best friend in college, would state
in the cross-examination that the College would debar a student if fees is
not paid on time and no such action was taken against the deceased. She
would also add that the deceased never complained to her that the
accused were refusing to pay the fees.
14. PW3, the mother, in her cross-examination, would admit that
when the RDO questioned her, she stated that the accused were taking
care of the deceased well, and she would add that since she was mourning
the death of the deceased, she could not state the harassment caused to the
deceased to the RDO. This statement, on the face of it, does not merit
__________
Page 12 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
acceptance. She would also state in her cross-examination that her
husband gave the complaint stating that the accused took care of the
deceased well. She further stated that she had never questioned the
accused at any point of time when the deceased complained to her about
the accused.
15. PW4 as stated above, had stated about a few instances of
cruelty said to have been committed. PW4 in the cross-examination
would admit that the deceased had first informed about the harassment
suffered by her only to one Sathya, who was very close to the deceased.
However, the prosecution had not examined the said Sathya. PW4 would
state that though she knew the harassment suffered by her sister, she had
not informed her parents before. Her other allegations are very vague and
not as against the accused. Thus, this Court is of the view that the alleged
harassment caused by the accused by non-payment of college fees has not
been proved by the prosecution. For reasons best known to the
investigating officer, the college authorities were also not examined as
could be seen from the answers in the cross-examination. The evidence
also discloses that the victim was going to the college until she committed
suicide.
__________
Page 13 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
16. The trial Court had, therefore, taken into consideration all these
aspects and had held that the accused were not guilty and accordingly,
acquitted both the accused. The reasons stated by the trial Court are
plausible and do not suffer from any perversity.
17. The other submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant is that the accused had misled the doctor [PW9] by stating that
the deceased had fallen in the bathroom, which is false; that the accused
had taken a stand that the witnesses had demanded money from them and
they have taken false and contrary stands, and the same has to be
considered as an additional circumstance in the case. It is also the case of
the de facto complainant that the accused are bound to prove the facts
exclusively within their knowledge as per Section 106 of the Indian
Evidence Act.
18. It is neither the case of the de facto complainant nor the
prosecution that the accused had caused the death of the deceased.
st
Therefore, the statement made by the 1 accused to the doctor, even
assuming that it is contrary to the facts, would be of hardly any
__________
Page 14 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
consequence in a case where the investigation only revealed that the
deceased committed suicide. The case relied upon by the learned counsel
for the appellant/ de facto complainant in Ramkishan Digambar Jadhav's
case [supra] , also would not be of any avail, since that was a case where
the deceased was done to death by the accused, which is not so in this
case.
__________
Page 15 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
19. It is well settled that in order to constitute abetment, the
intention and involvement of the accused to aid or instigate the
commission of suicide is imperative. The relevant observation of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurcharan Singh's case [supra], is extracted
hereunder.
“22. It is thus manifest that the offence punishable is one of
abetment of the commission of suicide by any person, predicating
existence of a live link or nexus between the two, abetment being the
propelling causative factor. The basic ingredients of this provision are
suicidal death and the abetment thereof. To constitute abetment, the
intention and involvement of the accused to aid or instigate the
commission of suicide is imperative. Any severance or absence of any
of this constituents would militate against this indictment. Remoteness
of the culpable acts or omissions rooted in the intention of the accused
to actualize the suicide would fall short as well of the offence of
abetment essential to attract the punitive mandate of Section 306 IPC.
Contiguity, continuity, culpability and complicity of the indictable acts
or omission are the concomitant indices of abetment. Section 306 IPC,
thus criminalises the sustained incitement for suicide.
......
29. Significantly, this Court underlined by referring to its
earlier pronouncement in State of W.B. Vs. Orilal Jaiswal (1994) 1
SCC 73 that courts have to be extremely careful in assessing the facts
and circumstances of each case to ascertain as to whether cruelty had
been meted out to the victim and that the same had induced the person
to end his/her life by committing suicide, with the caveat that if the
victim committing suicide appears to be hypersensitive to ordinary
petulance, discord and differences in domestic life, quite common to
the society to which he or she belonged and such factors were not
expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual to resort to
such step, the accused charged with abetment could not be held guilty.
The above view was reiterated in Amalendu Pal @ Jhantu vs. State of
West Bengal (2010) 1 SCC 707.”
20. The evidence, in this case only at best reveal that the victim
__________
Page 16 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences in
matrimonial life. There is no evidence to suggest that the accused had
intended to commit abetment of suicide or had caused cruelty of such a
nature, that the victim had no other option except to commit suicide.
Therefore, this Court finds no infirmity whatsoever in the judgment of the
trial Court.
21. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed. The acquittal of
accused/respondents 2 and 3, vide judgment dated 06.09.2019 in
S.C.No.324 of 2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court,
Salem, is confirmed.
11.11.2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
dk/ars
__________
Page 17 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )
CRL A No.164 of 2022
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
ars
To
1. The Sessions Judge,
Mahila Court, Salem.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Edapadi Police Station,
Salem District.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
Pre-delivery judgment in
CRL A No. 164 of 2022
11.11.2026
__________
Page 18 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:36:52 pm )