Widow’s Suicide: Gujarat HC Upholds Acquittal Of 2 Sisters-In-Law, Finds No Evidence They Drove Her To It

Pareshaben died by suicide on 16 February 2010, about two years after her husband’s death.

The prosecution alleged that her mother-in-law and two sisters-in-law harassed her, including by taunting her about her husband’s death and disputing her and her children’s interests in family agricultural land.

Her brother lodged the complaint, and the accused were tried for offences under Sections 498A, 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The Sessions Court acquitted them on 26 April 2016; the State and the complainant appealed.

One respondent’s death caused the appeals to abate as against her, leaving the appeals to proceed against the remaining respondents.

Sections 498A and 306 IPC respectively criminalise a husband or relative’s subjection of a woman to defined forms of cruelty, and abetment of suicide; the prosecution must prove the essential ingredients of the charged offence beyond reasonable doubt.

The Court referred to the principles governing appeals against acquittal in Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar, Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar v. State of Karnataka and Ramesh v. State of Karnataka: an appellate court may reappraise the evidence, but an acquittal reinforces the presumption of innocence, and where two reasonable views are possible, the acquittal should not be disturbed.

The Court also observed that a statutory presumption under Sections 113A or 113B of the Evidence Act cannot be invoked without material supporting an inference against the accused.

The Court found that the evidence did not reliably establish the alleged harassment or connect it to Pareshaben’s suicide.

The complainant’s account of telephone communications was unsupported by telephone particulars or other evidence, and the prosecution did not examine the Sarpanch who had reportedly informed him of the death.

A neighbour’s evidence was also weakened by his distance from the house, his lack of knowledge about any telephone connection, and his admission that he had not seen the sisters-in-law there shortly before the incident.

Further, the revenue records showed that Pareshaben and her children had been entered as co-sharers in the land, without objection by the respondents.

In the absence of credible evidence that the respondents’ conduct amounted to cruelty or abetted the suicide, the Court found no basis to displace the acquittal.

Both appeals were dismissed, the acquittal was confirmed, the bail bond was cancelled, and the record and proceedings were directed to be returned to the trial court.