PARDEEP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition is directed against the order dated October 12, 2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, vide which the petitioners have been charged for having abetted the commission of suicide by Smt. Beant Kaur.

(2.) SMT . Beant Kaur deceased, who was the wife of Pardeep Kumar, petitioner No. 1, allegedly committed suicide on December 12, 2000, while she was living with her parents at Ferozepur. On the matter being reported to the Police by her father Jugraj Singh. F.I.R. No. 492 dated December 12, 2000, was registered against the petitioners under Section 306 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, for having abetted the commission of suicide by her. The petitioners have been charged for the said offence by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur.

(3.) IT has come on record that Smt. Beant Kaur and Pardeep Kumar married each other on April 11, 1996 at Ferozepur. They lived as husband and wife at Ludhiana. No issue was born out of this wedlock. Their inter se relations became strained after a very short span of time. She left her matrimonial home at Ludhiana and started living in her parents house at Ferozepur with effect from 1st August, 1999. She filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of her marriage with Pardeep Kumar by a decree of divorce in the Court of District Judge, Ferozepur, on September 22, 1999. This shows that she was living at Ferozepur at the time of alleged commission of suicide by her on December 12, 2000. The petitioners cannot be held guilty of having abetted the commission of the crime by residing at Ludhiana. Moreover, in the report of the Forensic Medicine Department, G.G.S. Medical College, Faridkot, dated February 28, 2001 (Annexure P2), Dr. A.S. Thind and Dr. K.K. Aggarwal have given the opinion that the possibility of "the injury being suicidal is very remote and there are more chances of injury being otherwise." This report shows that it is not certain whether Smt. Beant Kaur had actually committed suicide or she was killed otherwise. It has been held by this Court in Mohinder Pal v. State of Haryana, 1998(2) Recent Criminal Cases 142, that in order to succeed prima facie for constituting the offence of abetment, there should be a direct or reasonable nexus between the act and the consequences. If there is no direct nexus, the offence of abetment would not be constituted. In the present case, the deceased had left her matrimonial home in the year 1998 and she committed suicide in the year 2000. In case the petitioners used to torture or harass her in the year 1998, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that they had abetted the commission of suicide by her after a gap of about two years. Thus, I am of the view that there is no direct or reasonable nexus between the act and the consequence. Moreover, it has come in the opinion dated February 28, 2001 given by the Forensic Medicine Board that the possibility of the injury being suicidal is very remote and there are more chances of the injury having been suffered otherwise. Thus, this report puts a question mark on the theory of suicide allegedly having been committed by Smt. Beant Kaur.