Continuous cruelty and proximate instigating conduct established abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.

Rashmi Prakash, wife of Dr. Sanjay Prakash, died by hanging on 15 December 2012.

Her brother, Ashish Nath, lodged the merg intimation, stating that the deceased had committed suicide.

The deceased and the accused had been married for approximately fourteen years and had two children.

During investigation, the prosecution alleged that the accused frequently consumed alcohol, assaulted and harassed the deceased, maintained an illicit relationship with a nurse, threatened to divorce the deceased and marry the nurse, and subjected her to physical and mental cruelty.

The post-mortem report recorded the cause of death as asphyxia due to hanging

The prosecution examined fourteen witnesses, including the deceased’s mother, father, brother, son and daughter.

The children attributed assaults, administration of sleeping pills and quarrels concerning the accused’s relationship with the nurse to the accused

The trial court acquitted the accused under Section 306 IPC but convicted him under Section 498-A IPC, sentencing him to three years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹10,000

The accused challenged his conviction in CRA No. 901 of 2016, while the deceased’s brother challenged the acquittal under Section 306 IPC in ACQA No. 88 of 2019

Whether the evidence established that the accused subjected the deceased to cruelty within the meaning of Section 498-A IPC, notwithstanding the absence of a proved dowry demand?

Whether the accused’s conduct amounted to abetment of the deceased’s suicide under Sections 306 and 107 IPC?

Whether the appellate court could interfere with and reverse the trial court’s acquittal under Section 306 IPC?

Whether the matter ought to be remanded for consideration of an offence under Section 302 IPC on the basis of the alleged strangulation and injuries?

The Court applied Section 498-A IPC, including both forms of cruelty under its Explanation: wilful conduct likely to cause grave physical or mental harm or drive a woman to suicide, and harassment connected with an unlawful demand; cruelty is not confined to dowry-related conduct

Sections 306 and 107 IPC require proof of suicide and abetment through instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid; abetment ordinarily requires a positive, proximate act accompanied by the requisite mens rea

Relying on Ude Singh v. State of Haryana, the Court held that mere harassment is insufficient, but a continuous course of conduct creating a situation in which the deceased perceives no option except suicide may constitute abetment

Relying on Jayadeepsingh Pravinsinh Chavda v. State of Gujarat, it reiterated that mens rea to provoke or contribute to suicide must be discernible and cannot simply be presumed

Under Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar v. State of Karnataka, an appellate court may reverse an acquittal where the judgment is perverse, based on misreading or omission of material evidence, and where only the view consistent with guilt is reasonably possible

The Court also relied on Vijendra Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh to hold that reliable testimony of related witnesses can independently sustain conviction after careful scrutiny

The Court found the evidence of the deceased’s mother, father, brother and children to be consistent on the material aspects: the accused’s illicit relationship with the nurse, repeated assaults, threats of divorce and remarriage, administration of sleeping pills, and continuing harassment shortly before the suicide

It held that this conduct constituted wilful physical and mental cruelty under Section 498-A IPC, even without proof of a dowry demand, and therefore affirmed the conviction

Regarding Section 306 IPC, the Court concluded that the accused’s continuous and proximate conduct, including assaulting the deceased, humiliating her in connection with the nurse, threatening divorce and creating circumstances in which she had allegedly lost hope of a normal married life, established instigation and a proximate nexus with the suicide

The trial court had relied on substantially the same evidence to convict under Section 498-A but disregarded it while acquitting under Section 306, without adequately explaining the alleged contradictions; this amounted to misreading or omission of material evidence and justified appellate interference under the principles governing appeals against acquittal

The Court did not accept the request to remit the case for framing a charge under Section 302 IPC and proceeded to decide the appeals on the charges before it

It allowed ACQA No. 88 of 2019, set aside the trial court’s acquittal under Section 306 IPC, and convicted the accused for abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC

The Court directed that the accused be heard separately on the question of sentence under Section 235(2) CrPC, and listed the acquittal appeal for hearing on sentence on 26 October 2026