Father Not Protecting Married Daughter Who Comes Back Home Alleging Abuse By Husband Can Lead Her To Commit Suicide: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has observed that when a married woman returns to her parental home alleging abuse by her husband, the failure of her parents, particularly her father, to protect her at that stage may also contribute to her decision to commit suicide.

The Court made this observation while setting aside the conviction of a husband under Sections 498A (cruelty by husband) and 306 (abetment of suicide) of the Indian Penal Code, holding that the prosecution failed to prove both charges.

Justice Gita Gopi was hearing a criminal appeal filed by Niranjankumar Chhanganlal Mehta (accused), challenging the judgment of the Sessions Court which had convicted him for cruelty under Section 498A IPC and abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC.

The prosecution case was that the marriage between the accused and the deceased was solemnised in 1994 and that the deceased was subjected to mental and physical cruelty by the accused during their matrimonial life, which allegedly drove her to commit suicide by jumping infront of a train along with her child. 

The Court noted that the prosecution had to prove active and willful conduct which pushed the wife to commit suicide, which it had failed to do through evidence. The Court further observed that the victim had returned to her parental home allegedly on account of physical abuse, but was sent back by her parents, which could also have potentially contributed to her suicide.

“When the daughter comes back to the parents and more specifically to the father with the hope of protection, the action of father not protecting the daughter at such stage of her matrimonial life could also be a ground for commission of suicide, where the daughter would have no recourse except to put an end to her life,” the Court noted.

The trial court had relied primarily on the evidence of the deceased's close relatives, who claimed that the accused habitually harassed and assaulted her, including after consuming intoxicants.

Appearing for the accused, Advocate H.B. Shethna submitted that the prosecution had materially improved its case at the stage of trial. He argued that several allegations regarding the accused's conduct and motive, including alleged ill-treatment and beatings, did not form part of the original complaint or the statements recorded during investigation, but were only brought up at trial. It was contended that such belated allegations could not be relied upon to sustain a conviction under Sections 498A and 306 IPC.

Opposing the appeal, Additional Public Prosecutor Rohan H. Rawal argued that the evidence of the family members of the deceased was consistent and clearly established that the accused had mentally and physically harassed the deceased, leading her to take the extreme step.

The High Court held that the prosecution had failed to prove that the victim had endured beatings immediately before leaving the house, and even if it had, it would not be sufficient to sustain an abetment to suicide charge.

“For the case to be considered as 'cruelty' under Section 498A I.P.C., it would be required to be established that the husband was wilfully beating and harassing with a view to force the wife to commit suicide. It has not been brought on record that the husband was beating the wife in his full senses… The allegation of consumption of alcohol and thereafter subjecting to the wife to physical violence would not meet the legal definition of cruelty as explained under Section 498A I.P.C. more so when such act has not be proved by any test report,” the Court observed.

The Court further noted that not every form of harassment or marital discord would amount to “cruelty” for the purposes of criminal liability under Section 498A. The conduct must be active and direct and of such gravity as to be likely to drive a woman to commit suicide to amount to abetment of suicide under Section 306.

The Court held that the prosecution had failed to establish that the accused had wilfully subjected the deceased to cruelty with the intention of driving her to take her life.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused of all charges.

Appearance: H B Shethna(2436) for the Appellant(S) No. 1

Mr Rohan H.Rawal APP for the Opponent(S)/Respondent(S) No. 1

Case title: Niranjankumar Chhaganlal Mehta V. State Of Gujarat

Case no.: R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1148 of 2003

Click Here To Read/Download Order