ASSOO Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, by way of special leave, arises out of the following facts:

(2.) The learned counsel for the appellant has at the very outset, pointed out that the evidence of PWs 1 and could not be believed as they were relatives of the deceased and that PW3 None Lal, another prosecution witness, had completely disowned the prosecution story and had given a different version all together, which, if accepted, would absolve the appellant of any misconduct. He has further argued that even assuming that there had been a quarrel between the appellant and his wife, it was not of such a nature which would have led her to commit suicide as envisaged under Section 306 IPC.

(3.) Mr. Vibha Dutta Makhija, the learned counsel appearing for the State has, however, has supported the judgment of the High Court and submitted that the evidence clearly showed that appellant had harassed his wife on account of her inability to bring the radio and the watch as demanded and that the ill- treatment had driven her to suicide.