1

MOOT COURT 2023

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT

AIR 1989 SC 378

WAZIR CHAND AND Anr.

(APPELLANT)

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA

(RESPONDENT)

FOR OFFENCES CHARGED UNDER INDIAN PENAL CODE,1860

UPON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT

WRITTEN MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

DATE:

THROUGH

ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................................................3
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES.........................................................................................................5
TABLE OF CASES:....................................................................................................................5
BOOKS:.......................................................................................................................................5
WEBSITES:.................................................................................................................................6
STATUTES:.................................................................................................................................6
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION............................................................................................7
STATEMENT OF FACTS............................................................................................................8
STATEMENT OF ISSUES...........................................................................................................9
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS................................................................................................10
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED.....................................................................................................13
ISSUE 1 : WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY U/S 306 R/W SECTION 107 IPC?.....13
ISSUE 2: WHETHER EVIDENCES ADDUCED BY THE RESPONDENT ARE ENOUGH TO
UPHOLD CONVICTION U/S 498A IPC?...................................................................................22
ISSUE 3: WHETHER LD. TRIAL COURT AND HON’BLE HIGH COURT ERRED IN
CONVICTING BOTH THE ACCUSED?....................................................................................30
PRAYER.......................................................................................................................................31
 3

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

& And

A.P. Andhra Pradesh

AIR All India Report

Anr. Another

Cr.P.C. Code of Criminal Procedure

Cri LJ / Cr. LJ Criminal Law Journal

Hon’ble Honorable

IPC Indian Penal Code

M.P. Madhya Pradesh

No. Number

Ori. Odisha
 4

Ors. Others

S./Sec. Section

SC Supreme Court

SCC Supreme Court Cases

St. State

U.P. Uttar Pradesh

u/s Under Section

v. Versus
 5

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

TABLE OF CASES:

1. M. Arjuna v. State, (2019) 3 SCC 315

2. Vikramsinh v. State of Gujarat, Criminal Appeal No. 514 of 1997

3. S.S. Cheema v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan, (2010) 12 SCC 190

4. Shobha Rani v. Madhukar, AIR 1988 SC 121

5. State of Punjab v. Daljit Singh, 1999 Cr LJ 2723 (P&H)

6. Krishan Lal v Union of India, 1994 Cr LJ 3472

7. State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal & Anr, (1994) 1 SCC 7

BOOKS:

1. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, 33rd Ed. (2011)

2. P.S.A. Pillai, (13th Ed. 2017)

3. Gaur, KD, Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, (6thEd. 2009)

4. Gupta and Dighe, Criminal Manual, (7thEd. 2007)

5. Kelkar, R.V. Criminal Procedure, (5th Ed. 2011)

6. Nelson R. A. Indian Penal Code, p. 837 (10th Ed. 2008)

 6

WEBSITES:

1. http://www.scconline.com

2. http://www.manupatrafast.com

3. http://www.livelaw.in

4. http://www.judis.nic.in

5. http://www.indiankanoon.com

6. https://www.ijllr.com

7. https://duelibrary.in/#/home

STATUTES:

1. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1973)

2. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act 18 of 1872)

3. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860)

4. The Constitution of India

 7

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The appellant has appeared before this Hon’ble court under article 136 of

constitution of India.1 Under article 136 of Constitution of India, this Hon’ble court

may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree,

determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any

court or tribunal in the territory of India except army courts. Article 136 of the

Indian Constitution gives this Hon’ble court power to accept such matter,

according to article 136 of Indian Constitution: Special leave to appeal by the

Supreme Court

(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Chapter, the Supreme Court may, in its

discretion, grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree,

determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made

by any court or tribunal in the territory of India

(2) Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to any judgment, determination,

sentence or order passed or made by any court or tribunal constituted by

or under any law relating to the Armed Forces

The Appellant humbly submits to the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble court.

1 INDIA CONST. art 136.

 8

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. That, the deceased Veena was married to Kanwar Singh on October 16,

1983. Wazir Chand and Krishna Devi are father-in-law and mother-in-law of

the deceased.

2. That, the deceased Veena sustained burn injuries at the residence of her

husband, she was rushed to the Geeta Nursing Home where she died.

3. That, the appellants Wazir Chand and Kanwar Singh as well as Krishna Devi

were charged and tried u/s 306[2] r/w section 107 and 498A of Indian Penal

Code.

4. That, Wazir Chand and Kanwar Singh both were convicted by the learned

trial court, therefore both appealed before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana

High Court. High Court confirmed the conviction but reduced the sentence.

5. That, this present special leave petition is preferred by the appellant to this

Hon’ble Court for setting aside the conviction imposed by the learned trial

court and Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court.

 9

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

ISSUE 1. WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY U/S 306 R/W

SECTION 107 IPC?

ISSUE 2. WHETHER EVIDENCES ADDUCED BY THE RESPONDENT

ARE ENOUGH TO UPHOLD CONVICTION U/S 498A IPC?

ISSUE 3. WHETHER LD. TRIAL COURT AND HON’BLE HIGH COURT

ERRED IN CONVICTING BOTH THE ACCUSED?

 10

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

ISSUE 1: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY U/S 306 2 R/W

SECTION 107 IPC?

It is humbly submitted that, deceased victim sprinkled kerosene over her body and

set herself on fire. It is pertinent to note that her husband and in-laws aided in the

incident by raising voice of television or radio in order to suppress her cries so that

incident could not attract the attention of neighbors. It is further submitted that

there is a deliberate delay in taking the deceased victim to the hospital can easily

be observed not only this but her husband and in-law admitted her to Geeta

Nursing Home instead of Civil Hospital which is equipped with better treatment

facilities for such a kind of burn injury. There is a deliberate delay of at least one

hour in taking the deceased victim to the hospital, it is pertinent to note that the

hospital where she was admitted is situated in the same sector in Faridabad where

the deceased victim with her husband and with her in-laws, was residing.

ISSUE 2: WHETHER EVIDENCES ADDUCED BY THE RESPONDENT

ARE ENOUGH TO UPHOLD CONVICTION U/S 498A3 IPC?

2 Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 306, No. 45, Acts of Parliament, 1860 (India).

3 Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 498A, No. 45, Acts of Parliament, 1860 (India).
 11

It is humbly submitted that the deceased victim was subject to harassment and

cruelty at the hands of her husband and her in-laws. It is pertinent to note that, the

husband and in-laws of the deceased victim were not satisfied with dowry and they

were continuously making demands for further articles of dowry. The husband and

in-laws of the deceased victim were harassing, humiliating, and insulting her in

order to fulfill further demands. The deceased victim, at various instances, deposed

to her relatives and her parents about the greedy nature of her husband and her in-

laws and she deposed this fact that she is being tortured for not paying sufficient

dowry. There is sufficient evidence on record which is enough to prove the guilt of

the accused.

ISSUE 3: WHETHER LD. TRIAL COURT AND HON’BLE HIGH COURT

ERRED IN CONVICTING BOTH THE ACCUSED?

It is humbly submitted that Ld. trial court was correct in convicting both the

accused and Ld. trial court successfully appreciated important evidence and

decided this matter on merits. Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana was also

correct in convicting both the accused; however Hon’ble High Court has erred in

reducing the conviction of the accused. Both the accused are charged with heinous

offences and we don't seem it justified to reduce the conviction. There is enough

evidence on record to convict both the accused under the charged offences. It is
 12

further submitted to this Hon’ble Court that technical lacunas should not be

grounds for reduction of the sentence or acquittal.

 13

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 1 : WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY U/S 306 R/W

SECTION 107 IPC?

a. Section 306 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 4 is a provision related to abetment of

suicide which states that:

“If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such

suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which

may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

In the light of above-mentioned legislation accused has committed the offence of

abetment of suicide. It is pertinent to note that both the accused abetted the

deceased woman for committing suicide for the purpose of further dowry from the

family members of the deceased victim.

b. Chapter V of Indian Penal code is related to abetment in which section 107 of

the act talks about abetment of a thing. According to section 107, IPC:

A person abets the doing of a thing, who:

First—Instigates any person to do that thing; or

4 PSA PILLAI, Criminal Law 1017–1031 (LexisNexis 2019).

 14

Secondly —Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy

for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of

that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or

Thirdly —Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.

Explanation 1—A person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful

concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily

causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is

said to instigate the doing of that thing.

Illustration: A, a public officer, is authorised by a warrant from a Court of

Justice to apprehend Z, B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z,

willfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to

apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the apprehension of C.

Explanation 2—Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of

an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and

thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.

The bare reading of legislation gives this idea that the accused has aided in

the incident by increasing the volume of the TV or radio and by causing

deliberate delay in taking her to the hospital.

 15

c. It is most respectfully submitted that, both the accused harassed, humiliated and

insulted the deceased victim till that instant that it seemed easy to die than living

with such a greedy family. Such humiliation, harassment and insult compelled the

deceased victim to end her life. She sprinkled kerosene over her body and set

herself on fire. It is further submitted that explanation 2 of section 107 states that

whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything

in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the

commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act. It is pertinent to note that

one of the accused increased the volume of TV or radio in order to suppress the

voice of the deceased victim so that she could not find any help from the

neighbors. There was a deliberate delay in taking the victim to the hospital which

contributed to her death.

d. It is most respectfully submitted that the father-in-law of the deceased victim

first of all approached Dr. N. K. Garg at around 6:30 am and requested him to see

her daughter in law which shows that the incident occurred at around 6:00 am to

6:15 am. According to Dr. Geeta of Geeta Nursing Home deposed in her statement

that husband and in-laws of the deceased victim reached the hospital at around

7:45 am to 7:00 am. It is pertinent to note that the accused in his own statement

deposed that the approached Geeta Nursing Home because of proximity factor.

Geeta Nursing Home is situated in the same sector of Faridabad where the
 16

deceased victim used to reside with her husband and her in-laws. It is further

submitted that no clarification is given by the defence advocate regarding the delay

in taking the deceased victim to the hospital. Both the accused deliberately avoided

going to Civil Hospital which was well equipped.

e. It is most respectfully submitted that in the case of S.S. Cheema v. Vijay Kumar

Mahajan,5 Hon’ble Apex court observed that abetment involves a mental process

of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing a thing. Without a

positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide,

conviction cannot be sustained. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the

cases decided by this Court is clear that in order to convict a person under section

306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an

active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option

and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that

he committed suicide. In the present case, it can easily be observed that the

accused aided in the incident by raising the voice of TV or Television and they also

delayed her to take to the hospital which shows the mental element and malicious

intention of the accused.

5 S.S. Cheema v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan, (2010) 12 SCC 190.

 17

f. It is most respectfully submitted that in the case of M. Arjuna v. State,6 Hon’ble

Supreme Court explained essential ingredients for the offence under section 306 of

Indian Penal Code. According to the Hon’ble Apex Court:

7. The essential ingredients of the offence under section 306

IPC are: (i) the abetment; (ii) the intention of the accused to aid

or instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide. The act of

the accused, however, insulting the deceased by using abusive

language will not, by itself, constitute the abetment of suicide.

There should be evidence capable of suggesting that the

accused intended by such act to instigate the deceased to

commit suicide. Unless the ingredients of instigation/abetment

to commit suicide are satisfied the accused cannot be convicted

under section 306 IPC.

It is pertinent to note that all the essential elements of the offence under section

306 are satisfied and there is no reason to acquit the accused from the charges.

g. It is most respectfully submitted that it is pertinent to mention here a view taken

by the Gujarat High Court. In the case of Vikramsinh v. State of Gujarat,7 court

stated that:
6 M. Arjuna v. State, (2019) 3 SCC 315.
7 Vikramsinh v. State of Gujarat Criminal Appeal No. 514 of 1997.
 18

“when the deceased is alleged to have committed suicide in

background of the facts and circumstances as discussed and

borne out from the testimony of witnesses, it cannot be said that

the ingredients for offence under section 306 or 498A are not

established. Much emphasis given by learned Advocate that

even if the offence under section 498A are stated to have been

established, it would not be much relevant as he has undergone

the sentence, and therefore, what he has been emphasizing is

with regard to the conviction for offence under section 306, is

also required to be appreciated. It is well accepted that it will

have to be considered from the totality of the facts and

circumstances and the material and evidence on record as to

whether offence under section 306 can be said to have been

established. As discussed hereinabove, the necessary

ingredients with regard to the abetment and creating the

atmosphere by which the deceased is led to commit suicide,

would attract section 306. It is such circumstance compelling

the woman to lead to commit suicide, will have to be

considered on the basis of material and evidence with regard to

the circumstance which have been created, which in turn has

 19

compelled her to commit suicide. A useful reference can be

made to the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in

case of Sohan Raj Sharma v/s State of Haryana, AIR 2008 SC

2108, where the Hon'ble Apex Court has succinctly observed

on this aspect that the abetment involves a mental process of

instigating a person or intentionally aiding that person in doing

of a thing. Therefore, it has been stated that whether it is a

suicide or accidental death, the chances of accidental death are

totally ruled out, and therefore, it is a suicide. Further, the

testimony of the witnesses, including the complainant uncle,

corroborated by the testimony of other witnesses and the

evidence with regard to the past conduct and the harassment

itself would be sufficient to maintain the conviction under

section 498A and 306 of IPC. The trial Court also, though has

not believed and accepted the charges for offence under section

304B, still has recorded the conviction under section 498A and

306 of IPC. Without much elaboration, since there is no

acquittal appeal preferred by the State, it would be suffice to

say that the trial Court has also failed to appreciate the other

evidence like the letters with regard to demand and has

 20

misdirected while giving reasoning that such a letter could have

been for some other purpose and cannot be said to be sufficient

for attracting the offence under section 304B of IPC also with

regard to dying declaration. Be that as it may, having

considered the totality of the material and evidence on record

and as the conviction has been recorded for offence under

section 498A as well as 306 of IPC, this Court is of the opinion

that it does not call for any interference. It is required to be

mentioned that recording of conviction under section 498A is

not much pressed by the learned advocate for the Appellants

and his main submission was with regard to section 306

contending that if there was no charge, the conviction under

section 306 could not have been recorded, and if that is set

aside, the sentence for offence under section 498A is almost

undergone, and therefore, he had prayed for setting aside of the

judgment. However, as discussed hereinabove at length, the

said submissions cannot be accepted, and therefore, in view of

the reasons recorded hereinabove, the present appeal deserves

to be dismissed.”
 21

The jurisprudence applied by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the abovementioned

case is very useful for deciding the present case.

 22

ISSUE 2: WHETHER EVIDENCES ADDUCED BY THE RESPONDENT

ARE ENOUGH TO UPHOLD CONVICTION U/S 498A IPC?

a. Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 is related to offence in which husband

or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty, provision states:

Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects

such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may

extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation-For the purpose

of this section, “cruelty” means—

(i) any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to

commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether

mental or physical) of the woman; or

(ii) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing

her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or

valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to

meet such demand.

b. It is most respectfully submitted that the husband and in-law of the deceased

victim were not satisfied with the dowry and they were continuously harassing,

humiliating and insulting her for that reason. It is further submitted that many

witnesses deposed in their statement that the deceased victim deposed to them
 23

about the further demand of dowry by her husband and in-laws. There are two

kinds of witnesses, one is a related witness and the other one is an interested

witness. It could not be said that all the related witnesses are interested witnesses

as well, specially in domestic matters women usually hesitate to share things to

strangers. In the present matter witnesses are relatives of the deceased witness

and the weightage should be given to them because they are only witnesses of her

sufferings.

c. It is humbly submitted that in the case of Shobha Rani v. Madhukar,8 Hon’ble

Supreme Court: the wife petitioned for divorce on the ground of persistent demand

made on her by her husband and by her in-laws. The high court took the view that

there was nothing wrong in these demands as money was needed by the husband

for his personal use and in such a case the wife should extend help. Reversing the

judgment, the supreme court held that demand for dowry is prohibited under the

law. That itself was bad enough. It is further submitted that Hon’ble Apex court

has taken this dowry thing very seriously which could be seen in its various

statements.

d. It is most respectfully submitted that in the case of State of Punjab v. Daljit

Singh,9 court observed that demand for money after four years of marriage for

8 Shobha Rani v. Madhukar, AIR 1988 SC 121.

9 State of Punjab v. Daljit Singh, 1999 Cr LJ 2723 (P&H).
 24

specific purpose, nowhere related to marriage demand but causing harassment to

the deceased wife so much so that she was bound to end her life is sufficient to

convict under section 498A. In the present case the theory of accidental death is

false and frivolous and the theory made by defence is not correlating with the

actual incident.

e. It is most respectfully submitted that, in the case of Krishan Lal v Union of

India,10 Hon’ble Apex court observed that, section 498A of Indian Penal Code or

section 113A of Indian Evidence Act has not introduced invidious classification

qua the treatment of a married woman by her husband or relatives vis-a-vis the

other offenders. On the other hand, such women from a class apart from those who

are married more than seven years earlier to the commission of such offnce,

because, with the passage of the time after marriage and birth of children, there are

remote chances of treating a married woman with cruelty by husband or his

relative. Thus, the classification is reasonable and has close nexus with the object

sought to be achieved, i.e. eradication of the evil of dowry in the Indian social set

up and to ensure that the married women live with dignity at their matrimonial

homes. It is further submitted that every person has right enshrined under article 21

of Indian Constitution which is right to life and personal liberty which include right

to live with dignity. The evil of dowry will never allow a women to live in this

10 Krishan Lal v Union of India, 1994 Cr LJ 3472.

 25

society with dignity and in order to eradicate this evil punishment for such offences

should be stricter.

f. It is most respectfully submitted that in the matter of State of West Bengal v.

Orilal Jaiswal & Anr,11 Hon’ble apex court appreciated evidence related to the

witness and on the basis of which the court convicted the accused. In this case

court observed that:

14. Coming to the finding that no specific date has been given

when the deceased had allegedly told her mother about the

demand of dowry and mal-treatment to the deceased it may be

indicated that although exact date has not been given, there is

positive evidence of the mother and the elder brother of the

deceased that when after about a month of the marriage, Usha

came to her parental house, she had narrated about cruelty and

mental torture suffered by her in the house of the accused. She

specifically complained that within a few days after her

marriage the father- in-law of the accused No. 2 had died and

in view of such death, she was abused and treated with cruelty

by the accused No. 2 Thereafter, on other occasions also

whenever she had come to the parental house, she had talked

11 State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal & Anr, (1994) 1 SCC 73.
 26

about such mal-treatment. Usha was alive only for about 10

months after marriage and it is nobody's case that the deceased

complained about the mal treatment given in remote past or

only on specific occasions so that exact date was required to be

mentioned. Coming to the finding of the High Court that the

adult member of the family of the deceased consisting of four

brothers, sisters and brothers-in-law and the father were

residents of Calcutta but Usha had not complained anything to

them and non-complaint to such close relations was not in

conformity with the human conduct, we may indicate that there

is no basis for such finding and such finding is contrary to the

evidences adduced in the case. We have already pointed out

that the deceased had complained to the mother and other

members of the family about the maltreatment and the

members of the family have deposed to that effect. The

prosecution case was not properly investigated by the police

for which the learned Sessions Judge has rightly commented

on the lapses on the part of the Investigating Officer, Sri Bimal

Chandra Biswas, Sub-Inspector of Police. As the Investigating

Officer failed and neglected to examine the members of the

 27

family of the deceased at an early date, the learned Sessions

Judge, in fairness, has not taken into consideration the

evidences of the sister and other close relations of the deceased

and has mainly relied on the evidence of the mother in basing

his finding. Even if it held that the deceased had complained to

her mother only about cruel treatment meted out to her, we

think that for a newly married woman, her misfortune in the

house of in-laws was not expected to be made public and

confiding to the mothers was only natural. Coming to the

observation of the High Court that the neighbors or the tenants

have not been examined, it appears to us that in the facts of the

case, no adverse inference can be drawn for such non-

examination. The abuse and insult hurled on the daughter-in-

law usually are not expected to be made public so that the

neighbors may have occasions to criticize the improper

conduct of the accused and hold them with disrespect and

contempt. The High court has expressed doubts about the

genuineness of the case of physical torture and abuses made by

the husband and the deceased for the absence of any

independent evidence given by the neighbours and cotenants

 28

about such physical assault or the abuses hurled on the wife by

the accused. We have indicated that ordinarily it is not

expected that physical torture or the abuses hurled on the wife

by the husband and the mother-in-law should be made in such

a way as to be noticed by the tenants living in the adjoining

portions of the house. It is also not the case of the prosecution

that the deceased was physically assaulted so violently that the

neighbors came to know about such assault. It is also not the

case that abuses used to be hurled loudly so that the tenants

had occasions to hear them. It was therefore not necessary to

examine neighbors or tenants to prove the prosecution case. In

the instant case, the evidence about physical and mental torture

of the deceased has come from the mother, elder brother and

other close relations. Such depositions by close relations, who

may be interested in the prosecution of the accused, need not

be discarded simply on the score of the absence of

corroboration by independent witness. Whether the evidence of

an interested witness is worthy of credence is to be judged in

the special facts of the case. In our view, the acts of cruelty by

the accused were expected to be known by the very close

 29

relations like mother, brother, sister, etc. The evidence of the

mother has been accepted by the learned Session Judge as

worthy of credence and we do not think that same should be

discarded, in the facts of the case.

 30

ISSUE 3: WHETHER LD. TRIAL COURT AND HON’BLE HIGH COURT

ERRED IN CONVICTING BOTH THE ACCUSED?

a. It is most respectfully submitted that the Ld. trial court had rightly convicted

both the accused and appreciated all the relevant evidence in order to convict the

accused. Hon’ble High Court has also convicted both the accused, however

Hon’ble High Court reduced the sentence awarded by the Ld. trial Court which

could not be said justiciable.

b. It is most respectfully submitted that on the basis of provision cited and

mentioned case laws it is clear that both the accused are guilty of the offenses

under section 498A IPC as well as under section section 306 IPC and Hon'ble high

Court of Punjab and Haryana has erred in reducing the given sentence given by the

Ld. trial court.

c. It is most respectfully submitted that Hon’ble High court of Punjab and Haryana

has failed to appreciate various factors of the incident occurred i.e. Hon’ble High

Court has ignored the gravity of the crime by reducing the sentence etc. various

factors such as deliberate delay in taking her to the hospital and raising the voice of

the TV or radio as well as humiliation, harassment and insult faced by the deceased

victim, all these factors were unable to get importance in the eyes of the court.
 31

PRAYER

A. State:

1. The actions of accused and available evidence shows that both the

accused has committed the offence of abetment to commit suicide.

2. Previous statements of the deceased victim and other evidence shows

that she was facing cruelty at the hands of her husband and relatives

B. Declare: restore the sentence given by the Ld. trial court.

AND/OR

Pass any order this Hon’ble court may deem fit, in the interest of justice, equity

and good conscience.

All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted.

Place:

Date:

S/d__________________

Counsel for the Respondent

32