Acquittal under Sections 498A and 306 IPC stands absent cogent evidence of cruelty or abetment.

Pushpaben, married to the respondent for about 15 years, had a son with him.

In March 2010, she reportedly told her father that her husband’s drinking and conduct caused her harassment; she returned to the matrimonial home on 17 March.

On 19 October 2010, Pushpaben and her minor son were found dead in a well.

The post-mortem attributed death to drowning, but the final diatom test report was not produced at trial.

The respondent was charged under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC.

The Sessions Court acquitted him, and the State appealed under Section 378 CrPC.

1. Whether the Trial Court erred in acquitting the respondent of offences under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC

2. Whether the acquittal involved an error of law or fact, or was vitiated by illegality or perversity warranting appellate interference

Section 498-A IPC criminalises a husband’s or relative’s cruelty, including wilful conduct likely to drive a woman to suicide or harassment intended to coerce compliance with an unlawful demand.

Section 306 IPC requires proof that the deceased committed suicide and that the accused abetted it; abetment is defined by Section 107 IPC to include instigation, conspiracy accompanied by an act or illegal omission, or intentional aid.

The Court stated that statutory presumptions under Sections 113-A and 113-B of the Evidence Act require at least some cogent material supporting an inference against the accused.

On an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court may review the evidence, but must account for the reinforced presumption of innocence; where two reasonable views are possible, the acquittal should not be disturbed.

The evidence did not establish a specific money demand, its fulfilment, or resulting harassment.

The agreement relied on by the complainant, executed around five years before the incident, concerned the respondent’s drinking and contained no reference to a monetary demand.

Nor was there evidence of what occurred between the deceased’s return and her death, that she entered the well with her son, or that she intended to commit suicide.

The prosecution therefore failed to prove cruelty within Section 498-A or any act of instigation, intentional aid, or other abetment under Sections 107 and 306 IPC.

The Court found no perversity or other basis to interfere with the Trial Court’s acquittal.

The appeal was dismissed, the acquittal confirmed, and the respondent’s bail bond cancelled; the record and proceedings were directed to be returned to the Trial Court.