Under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, a person shall be deemed to have abetted an act if he instigates any person to do that act, engages one or more other persons in a conspiracy for doing that act, or intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that act. None of the elements envisaged under Section 107 have been brought forth by the prosecution.

There is no investigation, no engagement, or abetment. The broad prosecution story is that, due to repeated ill-treatment, the deceased was prompted to commit suicide. None of the elements required under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code has been proved by the prosecution. Now, turning to Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, what is required to be established by the prosecution is that the husband should subject the wife to cruelty.

Cruelty has been defined in explanation (a) as any wilful 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 of the woman. There is no truthful evidence to show that the appellant had subjected the deceased to cruelty.

In the evidence of the witness, there is no direct evidence to show that the appellant subjected the deceased to cruelty, and if this piece of evidence is lacking, guilt under Section 498A IPC cannot be brought home against the appellant (Shekhar Amonkar vs State, 1995 (2) East CrLJ (NCC) 15 (Bom)).