Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act states the following:

          “When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the Court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband.”

With the provision being about a presumption and establishing of a fact on the basis of the given assertions, the time limitation of seven years has been made clear therein. When we talk about presumptions, we refer to inferences naturally or logically drawn from human experiences. In cases where married women are concerned, the above-mentioned provision connects us to the section of “Offences against Marriage” in the Indian Penal Code.

In a recent judgment laid down by the Telangana High Court, it was held as follows:

“It cannot be said that only for the reason of the deceased committing suicide, presumption has to be drawn against the respondents that they have abetted suicide.”[1]

It was held so on the basis of the time limitation which was exceeded. In this case, the suicide was committed by the married woman after seventeen years of marriage. The said rule of evidence talks about presumption of abetment when suicide takes place within seven years of marriage. The fact that the time period had exceeded seven years the applicability of Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act gets lost. In Gurubachan v Saptal Singh[2], the Supreme Court has held that s113A does not create any new offence, nor does it create any substantial right, but it is merely a matter of procedure and its retrospective operation will apply to the offence committed prior to the insertion of s113A of the Indian Evidence Act.[3] Also, in Nilakantha Pati v. State of Orissa[4], The High Court said that the presumption available here is rebuttable and such presumption can be raised where it has been provided that the wife has committed suicide within seven years of marriage and her husband must have subjected to cruelty. Even in the given case, the time period of seven years has exceeded and the cruelty aspect is not concrete as well. Hence, the scope of applicability of Section 113A is strictly limited to the constraints provided therein and does not attract any purposive construction in interpretation for instances beyond the mentioned guidelines in the provision.