HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.Appeal No.366 of 1997. Decided on: October 5, 2010. State of H.P. …Appellant. VERSUS Jamita Ram & ors ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B.Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant: Mr.R.K.Sharma, Sr.Addl.A.G. with Mr.Rajinder Dogra, Addl.A.G. For the respondents: Mr.Ashok Chaudhary, Advocate. R.B.Misra, Judge (Oral) The present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after the leave to appeal has been granted under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in reference to judgment dated 24.1.1997, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kangra District at Dharamshala, in Sessions case No. 8-J/96, thereby acquitting the respondents/ accused under Section 498-A and 306 IPC. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, was Smt. Asha Devi was married to Purshotam, brother of Whether the reporters of the local papers maybe allowed to see the judgment? …2… accused No.1 (who since has died) and also brother of accused No. 2 to 4. Three children were born from the wed lock of the deceased. It appears that on 24.6.1995, Asha Devi, victim-deceased, came to the matrimonial house from her father’s house. At that time, she was accompanied by her brother Purshotam PW-3, who also stayed for the night in matrimonial house of the deceased. It was further alleged that the accused party started quarreling with deceased and was also given beatings. Accused party asked said Asha Devi that why she left the matrimonial house without their permission. It has been further alleged that on the following day, in the morning, PW-3, Purshotam, brother of the deceased saw the accused party quarrelling with deceased. PW-3 went to the jungle to meet the call of nature and on his return, found her sister (deceased) unconscious. Accordingly Asha Devi was taken to the hospital for medical treatment and on suspicion police report was made and on investigation accused/respondents were charged for the aforesaid offences and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. 3. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as seventeen witnesses, whereas, the respondents/ accused, …3… through their testimony under Section 313 Cr.P.C., have denied the prosecution case. 4. Prosecution relied upon mainly the testimony of PW-1 Harnam Singh, father of the deceased, who in support of the prosecution case, has stated that accused persons had been quarrelling with the deceased and consequent upon such quarrel and maltreatment, Asha Devi, deceased, has consumed poison. However, police has not bothered to search the container of poison which has alleged to have been consumed by Asha Devi. 5. PW-2, Rai Singh had stated that he had always been advising to the deceased as well as to her husband to leave peacefully. From the statements of PW-1 Harnam Singh, PW-2 Rai Singh, PW-3 Purshotam Lal and PW-4 Tarmohdi Devi, it clear that deceased Asha Devi was visiting her father’s house quite frequently and PW-2, Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat gave a piece of advise to the deceased that she should not pay the visit to her parental house frequently and should act at the advice of her husband. 6. On scrutiny of prosecution witnesses and materials on record, we find that at no occasion, the accused/respondents had given beatings to the deceased and specific complaint to that effect was ever lodged with the police or any person concerned …4… who could have come forward to support the prosecution case. No specific complaint of mal treatment, beatings or demand of dowry was ever reported to the police or to any person. Record also does not reveal that ever demand of dowry was made and mal treatment was given to the deceased. 7. On analysis of the prosecution witnesses and materials on record, we do not find any act which could have forced the victim for committing suicide. The essential ingredient of committing suicide under section 306 IPC is abetment. In our considered view, no act of the accused persons, were so, directly or indirectly by which the abatement could have been proved. Surprisingly, husband of the deceased is not implicated anywhere as there is no grievance against the husband. Accused No.1 since has already died. In absence of any material on record, in our considered view, ingredients of Section 498-A and 306 of IPC are not made out. 8. In the facts and circumstances, the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt to the accused and there is no scope for interference in the impugned judgment. The criminal appeal, being devoid of any merit, is accordingly dismissed. …5… 9. Bail bonds, furnished by the respondents, are hereby discharged. (R.B.Misra), J. October 5, 2010. (V.K.Sharma), J. (sl)