Young women enter matrimonial homes with a hope of leading a long and blissful married life "but this hope, invariably, does not last long, nor their life", the Supreme Court observed today while upholding a five-year jail term of a man guilty of compelling his 25- year-old pregnant wife to commit suicide.
"The story of the deceased young lady, aged about 25 years who was forced to commit suicide by the unfortunate situation and circumstances surrounding her life, resembles the tale of so many similar young ladies who end their life due to untold miseries and hardships faced by them within the confines of the four walls of their matrimonial home.
"All of them enter such home with hope of leading a long and blissful married life but this hope, invariably, does not last long, nor their life," a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh said.
The apex court's verdict came on the appeal filed by convict Satish Shetty challenging Karnataka High Court's 2007 verdict by which he was sent behind bars for cruelly treating his wife and abetting her suicide in 1993.
A trial court had in 2000 acquitted Shetty and his parents of the offences.
The high court, however, had modified the order partly by sending the accused husband behind bars for the offences of 498A (subjecting woman to cruelty) and 306 (abetment of suicide) of the IPC.
The apex court, while upholding the high court verdict, said, "the High Court has come to a well considered finding that the deceased was being harassed both physically and mentally and in direct as well as indirect ways for non compliance with the demand of the accused for Rs one lakh for investment in his wine business."
"The High Court found that such harassment falls squarely under section 498-A of the IPC. We find no good reason to take a different view," it said.
The apex court also said the high court was justified in
criticizing the trial court for its "hyper technical approach" in blaming the mother of the victim for lodging a delayed complaint.
"On the basis of relevant facts the High Court appears to be justified in holding that there is good explanation for the delay in lodging the FIR...
"When the deceased died leaving a son of ten months old, the mother of the deceased had many other things to worry for, including cremation of the dead body and in such circumstances the High Court was justified in criticizing the trial court for its hyper technical approach in blaming the victim's mother for lodging delayed complaint," the apex court said.
The bench observed that "delay in lodging the FIR or complaint is not fatal in all cases. The Court must show some sensitivity in cases of present nature where the victim's closest relation-mother is a poor helpless lady."
"Even a well to do person may suffer a state of mental confusion when struck by such a tragedy...Hence in such cases the factum of delay has to be dealt with sympathetically keeping in mind mental condition of close relations of victim. The trial court miserably failed on this count too," it said.
According to the complaint, Shetty married the victim in 1991 and in 1993 she committed suicide due to mental and physical harassment at her matrimonial house. The victim left behind a ten-month-old son and was pregnant a second time.
Three days after the death, the victim's mother lodged the complaint with the police and a criminal case for offences under the IPC was registered.
Relying on the testimonies of the victim's family members that money had to be arranged during wedding to meet accused husband's demand, the apex court said, "The witnesses on this aspect were found trust-worthy...The trial court on the other hand went into unnecessary details to discuss this issue on the basis of capacity of the complainant to pay, source of money arranged by her and if actually money had been paid at the professed place or not.
