KOLANJI AMMAL Vs. JOTHILAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision is filed by the defacto-complainant, who is none-else than the mother of the deceased against the order of acquittal of the first respondent/accused from the charges for the offence under Section 306 IPC.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 22.1.2006 morning the deceased Priya aged about 12 years took one empty beer bottle near the house of the first respondent/accused Jothilakshmi and gave it to one cone-ice seller and had one cone-ice and the first respondent/accused beat her with wooden log and threatened her that she will instruct her husband to beat her and she further abused her by questioning her legitimacy and by instigating her to commit suicide and the minor girl felt so insulted and was so mentally upset and out of the shame committed suicide by pouring kerosine in her house at 12 pm on the same day and was admitted in the hospital with 75% burn injuries and despite due treatment, succumbed to injuries at 23.45 on the same day. THEreby the accused committed the acts constituting the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner would seriously argue against the correctness of order of acquittal by highlighting the error committed in framing the charges against the accused for the offence under Section 306 IPC instead of 305 IPC. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, any act of abetment of suicide of any person who is under 18 years age is severely punishable under Section 305 IPC as such the charges framed against the accused for the offence under Section 306 IPC, which is applicable for the act of abetment of suicide by the adult, resulted in injustice. It is further strenuously argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the allegations constitute the same offence and though the standard and nature of proof, to be let in to establish the guilt of the accused may be the same the approach of the Court below while deciding the commission of offence punishable under Section 305 and 306 IPC are to be different and as the offence punishable under Section 305 IPC relate to the death of a child below 18 years or delirious person the same may not be viewed in the same manner as that of the act of abetment of suicide of major and had the matter been viewed from that angle trial Court would have arrived at a right conclusion that the minor girl was abused by the accused and the same instigated her to commit suicide and would have found the accused to be guilty of the offence under Section 305 IPC.