Abetment of suicide requires proof of instigation or intentional aid; mere marital discord is insufficient for conviction.

Conviction for abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC requires proof that the accused instigated, conspired, or intentionally aided the suicide; direct or indirect incitement must be shown. Mere marital discord, harassment, or cruelty by the husband, without evidence of such abetment, is insufficient. The presumption under Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act was not enough on the facts because the material did not establish conduct amounting to abetment, and the marriage had subsisted for more than a decade. The conviction was therefore held unsustainable, and the appellant was entitled to acquittal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction for abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 could be sustained in the absence of proof of direct or indirect instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid, and whether the presumption under Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was attracted.

Analysis: Abetment is constituted only when the accused instigates, conspires, or intentionally aids the commission of the offence. In a case of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be evidence of direct or indirect acts of incitement to commit suicide. Mere marital discord, allegations of harassment, or cruelty by the husband, without more, do not establish the offence. The material on record did not show any conduct by the accused amounting to abetment, and the marriage having been more than a decade old, the statutory presumption under Section 113A was not sufficient to sustain the conviction on the facts proved.

Conclusion: The conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was not sustainable and the appellant was entitled to acquittal.

---