1 Appln 5844-2010 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5844 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra .Applicant V/s. Rajendra Tanaji Sonule .Respondent Mrs.M.M.Deshmukh, APP, for the Applicant - State None for the Respondent CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 6TH JULY, 2011 P.C. . Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2. This is an application for leave to file an appeal against acquittal of the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur. The learned Judge had, however, convicted the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs. 2 Appln 5844-2010 500/-. The respondent has not questioned that sentence. 3. The victim was married to the respondent about an year before the incident dated 21st September, 2009 when the victim died of hanging. She was pregnant of six months at that time. The learned Judge held that Cruelty as defined in Section 498(A) was proved but held that there was no abetment to commit suicide. The learned APP submits that since cruelty was proved, the learned Judge should also have held that this cruelty was the cause or abetment for commission of suicide by the victim. PW-10 victim's maternal uncle had deposed that the victim's mother-in-law had contacted him on phone a few days prior to the incident complaining that the victim was not taking meals properly and was not talking to her. The victim is alleged to have told her about pains in abdomen. On 8th September, 2009, the victim and her 3 Appln 5844-2010 mother-in-law as also the respondent came to PW-10's village when the victim's mother-in- law again complained about victim's not taking meal and not talking to them. They demanded a divorce or permission for second marriage. It seems that the victim then went to her parents house and stayed there till 13th September, 2009, when PW-10 received a call from victim's mother-in-law that he should come with his niece as well as her parents for a meeting at village Shiroli pulachi. In the meeting, the victim was asked whether she was ready to go resume co-habitation. The victim agreed and went back to the matrimonial home. The learned APP submits that the victim's reluctance to go back to the matrimonial home may also stem from the fact that she was fearing illtreatment at the hands of the respondent, who was suspecting her character. Therefore, according to her, it is possible that after the victim resumed co-habitation, illtreatment by the respondent started and 4 Appln 5844-2010 therefore, she committed suicide. There is no justification that imagining so many things to show that the victim was subjected to such illtreatment prior to the death as would constrain her to commit suicide. It would not be permissible to presume that the respondent had abeted commission of suicide. In the background of the fact that the victim was asked by the persons gathered at the meeting as to whether she was ready to go back to matrimonial home, it is just possible that the victim was reluctant to return to her matrimonial home and she seems to have ended her life which need not be on account of illtreatment or the conduct of the respondent. In view of this, View taken by the learned Judge cannot be faulted. Leave refused. Appeal dismissed. Criminal Application is disposed of. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)