Savero Devi and Others vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Bhawani Singh, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge (I), Kangra Division in Sessions Case No. 2 of 1989, dated November 2, 1989. Accused Savero Devi (mother-in-law), Damodari Devi (sister-in-law) and Kala Ram (father-in-law) have been convicted for offence under Sections 306/498-A/34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years (306/34,1.P.C), rigorous imprisonment for two years (498-A/34,1.P.C.) and fine of Rs. 5,000/- for each offence against each accused, and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for each offence. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently with benefit of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The amount of fine, on recovery, has been directed to be paid to the parents of the deceased.

Deceased Kaya Devi (hereafter ''deceased'') was the daugther of Prem Chand. She was married to Prakam in November, 1986. The prosecution alleges that the relations between the deceased and the accused were not cordial. The deceased was subjected to mal-treatment and a few days prior to the occurrence, the deceased gave birth to a son and when Smt. Krishna Devi (mother of the deceased) visited the deceased with ''Lugru'' along with a neighbour, complaint against the cruel treatment of. the accused was made to her. On May 2, 1988, the deceased was found missing from the matrimonial house. Two sons-in-law of accused Kala Ram visited the house of Prem Chand (father of the deceased) in the morning of May 2, 1988 and inquired whether the deceased had come there. Prem Chand told them that the deceased had not come there. However, during the day, Prem Chand was informed about the death of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was noticed by Arjun Singh below Punria Bridge. The Station House Officer, Police Station Baij Nath visited the spot on telephonic information from Vice-President of Gram Panchayat, Paprola. Since there was no Investigating Officer with the Railway Police under whose jurisdiction the matter fell, the Station House Officer, Baij Nath prepared the investigation report by visiting the spot again. Photographs of the dead body were taken. Articles lying at the spot were also taken into possession. The dead body was sent for post mortem examination which reported that it was the result of shock due to haemorrhage.

In the evening, the dead body was cremated in her matrimonial village. Prem Chand wanted the matter to be investigated. The Railway Police took charge of the matter and after investigation, a case for offence under Sections 306/304-B/498-A/34, Indian Penal Code was initiated in the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palampur who committed the same to the Court of Sessions where the accused were tried for offence under Sections 306/498-A and in the alternative under Sections. 304-B/34, Indian Penal Code. The accused pleaded not .guilty and claimed trial. The explanation offered by them is that they did not misbehave with the deceased. She was not subjected to any kind of ill-treatment or harassment. No demand for dowry was ever made. Moreover, according to custom, seeking of dowry was not there. During the delivery, the deceased was provided with good food and clothes. Services of mid-wife were engaged to look-after the deceased and wash her clothes. After eight days of her marriage, the deceased had gone back to stay with her parents for a year and thereafter she came to stay with them for one-and-a-half month on their invitation. It is also pointed out that the deceased was in the habit of taking liquor and after five-six days of the birth of the child, Smt. Krishna Devi, brought liquor for her and it was wrong to say that Smt. Krishna Devi brought ,Lugru'' and was with Smt. Machlo Devi. They have been falsely implicated and the witnesses have made false statements since they belong to the side of Prem Chand. The trial ended in the aforesaid conviction and sentence of the accused, hence this appeal.

The most important question to be settled in this case is whether the deceased was subjected to mal-treatment by the accused either generally or for dowry or for both. Prem Chand states that the marriage took place about three years back. Smt. Krishna Devi visited the deceased after the birth of the child with Machlo Devi. On return, she told him that the accused were not providing food to the deceased who was in a very bad condition. The accused had desired that the deceased be taken to her parents house. Perhaps on the next day of the return of his wife, she went to the Panchayat in this connection and told it regarding the apprehension of danger to the daughter from the accused. After the marriage, the deceased visited his house and complained to him that the accused were taunting her for not brining Television, sheep, goats and radio. He told her that he was poor, therefore, could not afford to give all those things to her. On being asked to pin point the accused, he stated that it might be father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased who might be making these taunts.

After marriage, the deceased visited him only once after one month of the marriage where after she went to the house of her in-laws. "It is at the instance of father-in-law and mother-in-law, she might have demanded the above stated articles from me. Excepting a talk with her regarding these articles on the aforesaid occasion, I did not have any talk with her on any occasion. I told this fact to the police also in my statement". It is not recorded in his statement Ext. PA. Again stated that he did not recollect whether Smt. Machlo was or not present at the time when his wife narrated the aforesaid incident to him. It was narrated to him by his wife on the next morning though his wife had returned from the house of the deceased on the same day. "I also told this fact to the police that my wife told me that accused Kala is not providing food to my daughter. And she is in great trouble". The statement that accused Kala was not providing food to his daugther, is not in Ext. PA. "I might have told the police that accused Kala told my wife that she should provide her four sons to Kaya Devi for her eating". This statement is also not in Ext. PA. He has denied that a false story for dowry demand has been concocted to implicate the accused.

Piar Chand (PW-2) says that Smt. Krishna Devi told him on April 23, 1988 that the deceased told her on Visit that her in-laws were not providing her with food and were torturing her. When she asked them not to do so, they asked her to take the deceased to her house otherwise she would be put to death, Smt. Krishna Devi wanted to move an application in this connection before him but he advised her not to do so since filing-of such application would strain the relations further. He told the police that Smt. Krishna Devi complained to him that her daughter''s-in-laws were not providing food to her. This statement is not in Ext. DA. He also told the police that Smt. Krishna Devi further complained to him regarding the threat to the deceased by her in-laws. Prior to that date he did not receiveany complaint. He did not maintain any record about the complaint of Smt. Krishna Devi to him. He denies that family member of Prem Chand work in his house. He did not remember any other complaint made by any other person during the month of April, 1988. He also denies that he made the statement involving the accused at the pressure of the police.

Smt. Krishna Devi (PW-4) states that the deceased used to visit her some times and told her that the accused would torture by saying that she should go away and earn her liyelihood by herself either by cleaning the utensils or by working as a labourer. All the accused used to remark that the deceased had brought less dowry arid what-ever had been brought, should be taken back. The accused used to ask her to bring television, radio, sheep, goats and refrigerator. Three days after the birth of the child she visited the deceased who told her that she was not being provided with food and clothes and that she was in very bad condition and forced to wash clothes herself. She carried oil for her. It was purchased at Paprola since the deceased was in bad condition. After six days, she visited the deceased again carrying ''Lugru'', Machlo Devi was also with her at that time, On her visit, the accused did not ask her to sit and the deceased started weeping saying that she was in a poor condition but when she asked the deceased to accompany her to her house, the deceased refused to do so. Her son-in-law was out grazing the cattle. The in-laws of the deceased stated that she could take the deceased since she was not wanted by them. She left the house of the accused the same day and went to the Pardhan of the Gram Panchayat the next day. On her report, the Pardhan told her that in-laws behave in that fashion and nothing could be done. Then she came hack to her house and left for Chamba since she has landed property in village Govar where she was told about the death of the deceased.

After the marriage, the deceased remained with her in-laws only for eight days and came to stay with her for a year. The deceased did not complain to her against her in-laws regarding her eight days'' stay in her matrimonial house. After one year when she visited her in-laws again, she stayed there for 15-16 days and came back to stay with her. Thereafter, she visited the matrimonial house when she had delivered the child. The deceased had talked to her about the non-providing of food by her in-laws when she visited the deceased after the birth of the child and before that she did not talk about it. She told her husband regarding the dowry demand of television, sheep and goat etc. by the in-laws of the deceased during the same night and the next morning left the house. She denies that the statement about the demand for dowry had been made only at the instance of the police otherwise no case could be initiated against the accused. She did not tell the-Pardhan that the deceased had told her about the demand of television, radio, sheep and goats by the accused. When her statement was being recorded by the police, she told them for the first time regarding dowry demand by the accused and the accused had also made this demand for the first time. She did not talk about it to any body before making this statement to the police.

This witness further states that she is ''Gaddi'' by caste like the accused. One gives dowry according to one''s capacity. She denies that when-ever she visited the deceased, she would carry liquor/''Rum'' for her. Her statement ''A'' to ''A'' (markDB) was wrong. It was wrong to say that the deceased was in the habit of taking liquor and she carried liquor for her. When the deceased was in the family way and staying at her house, the husband of the deceased wrote letters to her requiring her to come back, to the matrimonial home. She received 2-3 letters from her husband during this time. Those letters were received two months prior to her leaving for her in-laws'' house in connection with the delivery. Accordingly, thereafter, she went to her matrimonial house. She says that they do not work in the houses, of others, rather, they earn their livelihood themselves. Her elder son grazes sheep and goats and earns living by that way. All of them are dependent upon him. The deceased did not work as a domestic servant in any house nor she had any desire to do so, The dispute between the-deceased and her Maws was that they required the deceased to work as a domestic servant in the houses of others whereas she did not want to work as such.

Smt. Batro Devi (PW-5) states that the deceased had visited her house on invitation, when she was told that tile accused were taunting the deceased for bringing less dowry. She was not being treated well by the in-laws on account of that. She disclosed this fact to the police for the first time. Though she had talked to the sister of accused Kala, married in her village, however, this fact was not stated by her to the police. She did not talk to her husband in this regard including the Panchayat.

Smt. Sarla Devi (PW-6) states that the deceased had told her about the demand of dowry by her in-laws. She was called by the police on May 4/5, 1988, but her statement was. recorded on May 5,1988. She went to the police station in the morning and came back in the evening. The deceased had complained her for the first time regarding the behaviour of her Maws two months after the marriage. The talk took place in the'' presence of Aruna. The deceased had visited her parents on five occasions and she used to meet her in the presence of Aruna. Again says, she could not re-call how many times and after what intervals the deceased used to visit her parents after her marriage nor could she re-call the months of her visits. The deceased used to complain about her ill-treatment by her in-laws on account of dowry.

Smt. Megha Devi (PW-7) Ialo says that the deceased used to complain of her ill-treatment by her in-laws on account of dowry. She was called by the police on May 5, 1988 and Smt. Sarla was not with her on that day. She reached the, police station at 1.30 p.m. and came back at 5.00 p.m. Her statement was acorded all alone, Pardhan was not there. The police had visited their village on May 3, 1988 also. She did not state to the police that on last ''Baisakh'' when the deceussed was going to her matrimonial house before giving birth to the child, she was weeping bitterly and on being asked, she disclosed the dowry matter as stated above. This kind of statement is not stated in mark-DC. Similarly, the statement that whenever the deceased would visit her parents'' house, she would come to her for gossiping is wrong, though, it is recorded in mark-DC.

Smt. Machlo Devi (PW-8) states that the deceased told her one month prior to the delivery of the child that the accused were torturing her on account of dowry. She accompanied Smt. Krishna Devi to the house of the deceased on 5th/6th day of the birth of the child when ''Lugru'' was taken to the deceased by her mother. There, the deceased stated that she was not getting, food in time and that she was in great hardship. Her father-in-law and mother-in-law were misbehaving with her. When these facts were brought to the notice of the accused, they started quarrelling with Smt. Krishna Devi and said that in case they wanted, they could take their daughter back to their house. After ten-fifteen days of the marriage, the deceased visited her parents every now and then. Between her marriage'' and before she left for her matrimonial house in connection with the delivery of the child, she met the deceased two-three times. At the first instance or in the beginning, the deceased did not complain to her but she did so later on. When ever she would visit her, her husband used to be present in the house but he did not hear the talks between them. She did not talk to her husband regarding the complaint of the deceased because he usually remained out in connection with grazing of animals. It was wrong to say that the deceased used to take liquor and it was taken to her. Her statement was recorded by the police one month after the death of the deceased. She was accompanied by Prem Chand to the Police Station.

The deceased was subjected to post mortem examination by Dr. P.S. Patial, Senior Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Palampur (PW-13). Amongst other things, he noticed that:

"I have seen the maroon coloured Sweater Ext. P 15, Shirt and Salwar of the same colour Ext. P 16 and 17 respectively. Cotton shawal (pink) Ext. P. 18, one light green coloured synthetic underwear P 19, Red Coloured Purahda Ext. P. 20, two white metal rings Ext. P. 21 and Ext. P. 22 respectively Golden nose ring Ext. P. 23, Five red coloured plastic bangles Ext. P. 24, two pink light red coloured plastic bangles Ext. P. 25 (one on the right wrist and other on left wrist) a pair of payal on each side of the ankle Ext, P. 26, one BICHWA (silver) on the right second toe Ext. P. 27. A pair of the two hair clipes (silver) attached to each other with chain Ext. P 2S, Two ear rings (silver) Ext. P 29.

These ornaments and clothes, referred above, were on the person of the, deceased, when she was brought for post mortem and before conducting the post mortem these were removed by my Assistance in my presence. Then all these clothes and articles were sealed in parcel in my presence in my room".

Arjun Singh (PW-3) noticed the dead body of the deceased below Punna Railway Bridge when he peeped down. He had been told about the missing of the deceased by the accused. He had advised the accused to search for her here and there who had told him that she was not traceable. So he had gone in search of her towards village Manjerna. In his cross-examination he states that:

"Kaya Devi also used to visit my house. She did not complain to me against the accused at any time. She never disclosed that she is not being provided with food or the clothes or that she is being starved. She never complained that her in-laws demanded T.V. or Radio from her. Volunteered, we are the poor people and we do not require these articles. Smt. Kaya Devi used to consume liquor".

This witness has not been declared hostile by the prosecution.

HC Birbal Ram has not been examined by the prosecution. He has been produced as a defence witness (DW-1). He states that he recorded the statement of Smt. Krishna Devi (mark-DB). Whatever Smt. Krishna Devi deposed before him, he recorded the same accordingly. He did not add or omit anything. This statement was recorded by him at the time when challan was already prepared. After recording the statement, the file was again delivered to SHO Gian Ghand. After the receipt of the report of Chemical Examiner in which there was mention regarding presence of alcohol in the body of the deceased, he recorded this statement to verify that fact.

It was wrong to say that the statement Ext. D B was not deposed by Smt. Krishna Devi and that he recorded it of his own. It was also wrong to say that after recording Ext. DB, the file was not delivered by him to SHO Gian Chand.

Raj Kumar (DW-2) is the Up-Pardhan of Gram Panchayat, Paprola. He states that on May 2, 1988 at about 6/6.30 a.m. accused Kala Ram, accompanied by Tilak Raj, came to him and reported that their daughter-in-law was not at home. He advised them to make search for her since she could not go eke-where. He also advised them to report him again in case she was not traced. At 7.30 a.m. they came to him and stated that the dead body of the deceased was lying below, Punna Bridge. At once, he telephoned the police, Police Station, Baijnath. It reached after about an hour. He accompanied them to the place where the dead body was lying. Apart from railway crossing, people also use it since it connects 5-6 villages. The height of the bridge is about 150-200 feet. The deceased was wearing red clothes and her hair were properly dressed. She was also wearing ornaments, there was red "Prarnda in her hair. She had currency notes of Rs. 50/- in her clothes. She was smelling of liquor. He was called by the police to witness the recovery of currency notes. It was wrong to say that the deceased was not smelling alcohol and he was deposing falsely.

Smt. Phullan Devi (DW-3) states that she is mid-wife by profession, working for the past fifteen years. She worked as mid-wife with the deceased. She had been engaged for this purpose one month advance of the delivery of the child by accused Kala and his son. She visited the deceased 3-4 times during the delivery period. She massaged the deceased with ''Til'' oil. The deceased used to take milk with ''Chuhras'' and ghree. These articles were provided by the accused to the deceased. The deceased was given almonds and ''Mewa'' also. It was wrong to say that the deceased used to wash clothes herself and was not being provided with necessary food at the time of the delivery of the child. She charged Rs. 50/-in connection with the delivery of the child.

Dr. P.S. Patial (PW-13) while conducting post mortem examination, also observed as under:

"Abrasion on the back of the left side of the chest in its lower part brown in colour on cutting the tissues and muscles there is a dark coloured blood from the cut surface. Size of this abrasion was 8 x 7cm Similar type of abrasion 3 cm below the first one brownish 6 cm above and lateral to anterior illiac spin of the left side, measuring 8 cm X 5.2'' cm.

Longitudinial abrasion on the lateral aspect of the left thigh measuring 5 cm x 2 cm brownish in colour on cutting, the wound clotted blood found-in the subcutaneous tissues.

Contusions lateral to the No. 3 abrasion, described above reddish brown in colour measuring B cm x 5 cm. On cutting the tissues black coloured blood oozed out.

Abrasion in the middle of the left gluteal region 6 cm x 2 cm in size brown on colour.

Abrasion on the upper left part of the left leg (lateral aspect) 6 cm x 5 em. Reddish brown in colour.

Contusion on the left chin upper part anterior aspect, (2 cm x 1 cm).

Multiple linear abrasion running in the different directions present over the lower part of the chest and upper half of the abdomen.

There is deformity of the right thigh in its lower portion. On detection there was black coloured clotted blood present. On cleaning of muscles and fascia of the right thigh fracture was found on the lower part of the right femur... Injuries already described above. There is the deformity of right thigh due to fracture of right femur in its lower one third. No sign of any dislocation".

"I preserved the viscera of the dead body and the reconstituted body of the deceased was handed over to the police to constable No. 45. Parcel containing clothes and ornaments having 4 seals. Copy of the post mortem report No. 9/88 dated 2-5-88. Wooden box having 8 seals containing viscera and a copy of forwarding letter to the Chemical Examiner to the Government of Punjab/Patiala. Sealed envelope having four seals containing forwarding letter, inquest report numbering 6-duly signed by me and a copy of post mortem were delivered to ... constable Hem Singh No. 45 of Railway Police Paprola. The seal was bearing the impression CHP.

"These injuries on the person of Kaya Devi could be possible in case she jumps from a height of 70 feet. By jumping from such a height and by sustaining the injuries, her death was quite probable".

As to the presence of alcohol, he states that the same may be produced during the storage of autopsy blood by formentation of proteins and carbohydrates present in the blood through the action of enzymes and bactaria. But, during the cross-examination he states that as per the report of the Chemical Examiner, the alcohol was present in the vital organs of the body. It depends upon the quantity of the alochol consumed that leads to confusion, muscular incordination and staggering of gait, in case it is consumed in excess and not otherwise, the above consequences will follow.

From the aforesaid statements of the witnesses it is clear that the accused and the deceased belonged to ''Gaddi'' families depending upon the income from sheep and goats moving from one place to the other with very small land holdings. Atleast one person from the family remains out for months together looking after animals in distant places normally allotted by the Government, according to seasons. Consequently, the husband of the deceased was away. There is no evidence pointing out any kind of disaffection between the couple. Away-from the family, the husband had written two-three letters to the deceased to come to the matrimonial house for the purpose of delivery of child. The deceased acted accordingly. Had there been any kind of trouble between the two families or the behaviour of the accused towards the deceased tortuous, as alleged, her parents would have prevented the deceased from leaving their house and stay with the in-laws. Normally, first delivery takes place in parents house, but this has not happened in this case. The accused did not show any kind of reluctance or protest either against the husband asking the deceased to come to the house for delivery of child or to the deceased directly or to her parents.

The deceased gives birth to a son. It is the first son. It is the family. Obviously, it would have brought happiness to the accused. So, why should they maltreate the deceased, not provide her food and not look-after her well? It has been stated by Smt. Phulan Devi (DW-2) that she was engaged by accused Kala Ram and husband of the deceased a month before the delivery of the child. She had been attending the deceased for number of days. The accused used to provide the deceased milk, ghee, almonds ''Chuhras'' and ''Mewa'' in abundance. There; is no independent evidence pointing out the neglect of the deceased by the accused during this time,, therefore, the statements of Smt. Krishna Devi, Smt Machlo Devi are false and liable to be rejected.

It has been held in New Theatres (Carnatic Talkies) Ltd., Coimbatore Vs. N. Vajrapani Naidu, that (para 48- p. 1636):

"48. Before discussing the evidence of the witnesses we might mention a few preliminary remarks-against the background of which the oral statements are to be considered. All persons to whom the oral statements are said to have been made by Manju when she visited Beed for the last time, are close relatives and friends of the deceased. In view of the close relationship and affection any person in the position of the position witness would naturally have a tendency to exaggerate or add facts which may not have been stated to them at all. Not that this is done consciously but even unconsciously the love and affection for the deceased would create a psychological hatred against the supposed murderer and, therefore, the Court has to examine such evidence with very great care and caution. Even if the witnesses were speaking a part of the truth or perhaps the whole of it, they would be guided by a spirit of revenge or nemesis against the accused person and in this process certain facts which may not or could not have been stated may be imagined to have been stated unconsciously by the witnesses in order to see that the offender is punished. This is human psychology and no one can help it.

There is serious doubt about die visit of Machlo Devi with Smt. Krishna Devi whose statement was recorded by the police after long lapse of time. Visit of Smt. Krishna Devi to the house of the deceased 5/6 days after the delivery of the child, is a material fact in the case. It must have been noticed by the police right in the beginning of the investigation, therefore, omission to record her statement in time causes serious set back to the fairness of the investigation and testimony of this witness. Finding of alcohol in the viscera of the deceased fruiter demonstrates that the prosecution has not tried to find, out the genesis of the offence. Case of the accused is that the deceased was in the habit of taking liquor and Smt. Krishna Devi had been providing her liquor. When the deceased was visited by Smt. Krishna Devi, one quarter of liquor was brought for her. It has been denied that Smt. Krishna Devi brought ''Lugru'' for the deceased. Detection of alcohol strengthens the explanation of the accused and falsifies the statements of Krishna Devi and Machlo Devi.. In case the deceased had complained.to these ladies about the behaviour of the accused in not providing her meals and asking her to wash clothes thereby subjecting her to maltreatment, Krishna Devi should have stated this fact to her husband on reaching the house and gone to the Panchayat to report the matter. She did not-do so. She is not sure when she staled this fact to her husband. To Pardhan Piar Chand, she goes the next day. He does not record any statement nor takes further action in the matter. It appears, no complaint was made to Smt. Krishna Devi by the deceased that is why she did not lodge report with the Panchayat. There is no record about this aspect of the episode except oral statements of Smt. Krishna-Devi, Smt. Machlo Devi and Shri Piar Chand which are hardly dependable. The allegation of dowry demand may, now, be discussed.

Apart from the fact that giving of dowry is neither a custom nor insisted in such families. After short stay with her in-laws, the deceased came to stay with her parents for many months. She leaves them for delivering the child. Firstly, there is no demand for dowry in such families; secondly, no such demand was made soon after the marriage, thirdly, most of the articles demanded are hardly used by such families since they can neither afford them nor the same can be carried and used at places visited by such families; fourthly, the demand was neither protested by the parents nor reported to either Panchayat or police or to village elders; fifthly, it has been raised at a late stage without being the condition of the marriage between the parties; sixthly, the evidence on this aspect is interested, vague, conflicting and exaggerated. If one looks at the statements of Smt. Batro Devi (PW-5), Smt. Sarla Devi (PW-6), Smt. Megha Devi (PW-7) and Smt. Machlo Devi (PW-8), it can be noticed that they have by-passed even Prem Chand (PW-1) and Smt. Krishna Devi (PW-4) who were expected to know the things better than these witnesses. The story of demand for dowry and subjecting the deceased to torture on that basis, is totally false. It has been concocted simply to involve the accused in this case. Look at the body of the deceased found below Punna Railway Bridge. The statement of Dr. P.S. Patyal (PW-13), quoted above, clearly shows that the deceased was well-dressed-wearing a suit, sweater, shawl and various kinds of ornaments. She was fully dressed elminating the allegation that she was not being treated well.

Recently, the deceased had given birth to a male child. After all she was to look-after it being the mother. Why should the mother of such a small child leave the house? Her disappearance from the house was not preceded by any kind of quarrel between her and the accused since there is no evidence. However, there is evidence that the deceased was visited by Smt. Krishna Devi. Since alcohol was found in the viscera of the deceased, the explanation of the accused that the deceased was in the habit of taking liquor and Smt. Krishna Devi had brought her liquor on her visit, cannot be disbelieved. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that in the state of intoxication the deceased left the house for visiting her parents'' house and fell from the highly dangerous railway bridge. Receiving of such injuries by such a fall are also possible, according to Dr. P.S. Patyal (PW-13). At least they were not caused by the accused, being serious and after sustaining them, it was hardly possible for the deceased to have walked to that distance nor there is evidence that she was killed and the body kept at the place where it was found subsequently. It can legitimately be concluded that the deceased was well-dressed and left the house of her ojm and died by fall from the railway bridge. Since the bridge was being used by villagers of five-six villages routinely, fall in normal course was not possible, therefore, the deceased fell on account of intoxication.

Recording of the First Information Report has also been delayed. There is no satisfactory explanation for it and it can be said that the case took this kind of turn by due deliberation in which the police appears to have played a leading role. After the disappearance of the deceased from the house, the accused were genuinely searching for her. Two sons-in-law of accused Kala Ram went to her parents'' house to know whether she had gone there. This fact was stated to Arjun Singh (PW-3) also. He searched the deceased at the request of the accused'' and found the dead body. The matter was reported to the police. It was taken to the hospital for post mortem by the police and accused Kala Ram and Prem Chand were with the dead body. It was handed over to accused Kala Ram. It was cremated and the cremation ceremony was attended by Prem Chand. Till this time there was no doubt about the involvement of the accused in the death of the deceased. The case took sudden turn the next day and allegations of dowry demand and mal-treatment of the deceased by the accused surfaced to the ground. The police collected suitable statements to support its case not knowing that the Chemical Examiner''s report would pose a serious, challenge to it later-on.

The evidence discussed above, therefore, eliminates the participation of the accused in the commission of the crime. The prosecution has miserably failed to connect the accused with the crime. The trial Judge has not appreciated the evidence properly leading to a wrong conclusion.

Accordingly, this appeal is accepted, conviction and sentence imposed on the accused is hereby set aside. They are acquitted of the charge. Bail bonds and surety bonds if any executed by the accused are hereby discharged.

Appeal accepted