- (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned State Public Prosecutor.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution was that accused no.1 had claimed that he was in love with Sannamaramma, the sister of the complainant and assuring her that he would marry her, he is said to have had sexual intercourse with her over a period of time and ultimately, she was pregnant with a child. When this was revealed by Sannamaramma to her sister -in -law, she had taken Sannamaramma to Cheluvamba Hospital at Mysore and got her examined and it was confirmed that she was pregnant by about six months. PW.10, the sister -in -law had informed her husband PW.22 and PW.1 - the complainant, who was the brother of the deceased Sannamaramma. They had met the village elders and informed them about the circumstances, who, in turn, had asked them to lodge a complaint with the Heggadadevanakote Police Station, which in turn, had sent for accused no.1 - appellant no.1 herein and his father and other panchas of the village and at the said meeting, accused no.1 had agreed to marry Sannamaramma, for which they had sought for 15 days' time. However, it was claimed that the father of the accused no.1 did not permit the marriage of the deceased with the accused and in the meanwhile, he was admitted to a hospital at Mysore. The elders of the village namely PWs.1, 8 and 22 and others had met the father of the accused no.1 at the Hospital at Mysore and again had requested him to arrange the marriage. They were told that accused no.1 was not in the village and that the marriage would be arranged after he returned to the village. In the meantime, Sannamaramma was apprehensive that she would be deserted by the accused and his family and therefore she decided that she would put her foot down and go and reside in the house of accused no.1 to prevent any such desertion and she went and settled down in the verandah of the accused no.1 at Chikkanandi, Chamalli village. Accused no.1 had continued to remain incommunicado and did not return to the village. Accused nos.2 to 10, on the other hand, had strong exception to Sannamaramma coming to their house and seeking to settle down in the verandah and they abused her and threw her out of the house. Further, it is alleged that accused no.4, in particular, had severely abused her in foul language and had assaulted her and threatened to do away with her life, if she continued to trouble them. This treatment meted out to her had consumed her in shame and therefore on the intervening night of 4.5.2006, she had hung herself in the verandah in the house of the accused no.1, which was noticed in the morning and thereafter, the complaint was lodged and further proceedings were initiated. Charges were framed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity) read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity).
(3.) THE accused having pleaded not guilty and having claimed to be tried, the prosecution had examined 22 witnesses and got marked several documents apart from material objects. After recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the court below framed the following points for its consideration: "1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused No.1 had assured deceased Sannamaramma that he would marry her and thereby he had sexual intercourse with her and accordingly, deceased Sannamaramma had become pregnant for about 6 months and thereafter he refused to marry her and when deceased Sannamaramma had gone to reside in the house of A.1, A.1 to A.10 abused her, drove her out of their house and accused no.4 assaulted her, abused her stating that as to whom she had become pregnant, and being insulted by the said act, deceased Sannamaramma committed suicide during the intervening night of 4.3.2006 and 5.3.2006 in the veranda of the house of accused No.1 and thereby all the accused abetted the commission of suicide by deceased Sannamaramma and thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 306 read with 34 of IPC? 2. Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that whether all the accused a betted commission of suicide or any of the accused abetted commission of suicide by deceased Sannamaramma - The court below held Point no.l partially in the affirmative and Point no.2 also partially in the affirmative. It is that which is under challenge in the present proceedings. The learned Counsel for the appellants would straight away submit that having regard to the ingredients of Section 306 of the IPC, the question whether the alleged offence committed by the accused can be brought home within the definition of Section 306 IPC, is itself not tenable. And hence the learned Counsel would submit that the court below having found that the appellants had instigated and abetted the suicide of Sannamaramma cannot be sustained. The learned counsel has also raised other grounds in seeking to question the sustainability of the judgment, the emphasis is however, on the above said primary contention. The learned counsel seeks to place reliance on several authorities in support of the above contention. It is hence prayed that the appeal be allowed and the accused be acquitted.;