Introduction  

In this case, the Supreme Court held that the cases of abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct abatement before the suicide. 

Facts 

• In this case, the appellant was a doctor married to Dr. M. Amali Victoria (deceased), who was found dead in their home’s washroom. 
• The cause of death was asphyxia due to external compression of the neck. 
• The police (defendant) registered the First Information Report (FIR) under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). 
• After three weeks, the mother of the deceased filed an FIR against the appellant, his father, and his mother under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Thereafter, the FIR was converted from Section 174 CrPC to Sections 498A and 306 IPC. 
• It was argued that the deceased was suffering from mental cruelty as the appellant used to torture her for having a second baby despite the fact that the deceased had a miscarriage in her second pregnancy. 
• She also argued that before the birth of their first child, the appellant used to harass the deceased and torture her for not being able to get pregnant. 
• The Trial Court ordered the conviction of the appellant and the mother-in-law of the deceased while acquitting the father-in-law of the deceased. 
• The appellant appealed before the Madras High Court, which dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order of the Trial Court. 
• Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court. 

Issue Involved  

• Whether the conviction of the Appellants for the offence under Sections 306 and 498A IPC is sustainable or not? 

Observations 

• The Supreme Court observed that just before the death of the deceased, there was no evidence to show that she was being abetted or that any humiliation took place which led her to commit suicide. 
• It was also observed by the court that, in such matters, the court should base its decisions on facts and the circumstances of the case, rather than on emotions and sentiments. 
• The court further observed that, to prove the allegation under Section 498A of the IPC, there was no proof available except for the testimony of the mother of the deceased, who could confirm such acts. 

Conclusion 

The Supreme Court reversed the order of the High Court and the Trial Court and allowed the appeal and acquitted the appellant.  

Note 

• Section 306 IPC is now Section 108 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 
• Section 498A IPC is now Section 85 and Section 86 of BNS, 2023.