Judgment B. R. ARORA, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 12-3-91, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants for the offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A, I. P. C. ( 2 ) THE appellants were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh, for the offences under Sections 498-A and 304-B, I. P. C. The case of the prosecution is that on 214-1986, Smt. Sharda D/o PW 5 Banwari Lal, was married to accused-appellant Atma Ram. After her marriage she was subjected to cruelty and harassment for the demand of one Maruti car by the husband and his family members, due to which she drunk insecticide and died on 2-9-87. A day earlier to that, i. e. , on 1-9-87, PW 6 Anil Kumar the brother of deceased Sharda had gone to meet her and he was informed by his sister, viz. , Smt. Sharda on 1-9-87 that her husband and other members of his family were demanding a Maruti car as dowry and if their demand regarding the Maruti car would not be met-out then they would kill her. Anil Kumar went to village Wasih to inform this fact to his maternal grand-father Uda Ram. Uda Ram the maternal grand-father and Dharamveer the maternal uncle of deceased, along with Anil Kumar, came to village Kisanpura, where they were informed that Smt. Sharda had taken insecticide and died. From there she came to village Sadulshahar, where she was brought by her in-laws members for treatment and they found Smt. Sharda dead. The case of the prosecution, further, is that about fifteen days before, a Panchayat was held, in which Uda Ram, Dharamveer, Banwari Lal along with Chaina Ram, Sahib Ram, Devi Lal and Daulat Ram had gone to village Kishanpura to pacify the accused party and to request them to call for Smt. Sharda. There a demand for a Maruti car was made by the accused persons and they requested for two-three months time to meet this demand and requested the accused to call Sharda, who, by that time was living with her parents. The accused-party acceded to their request and thereafter before ten-twelve days of the incident, Smt. Sharda was sent to her in-laws house, where she died on 2-9-87. The accused-party acceded to their request and thereafter before ten-twelve days of the incident, Smt. Sharda was sent to her in-laws house, where she died on 2-9-87. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined eleven witnesses and the accused, in their defence, examined two witnesses. The learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh, after trial, convicted the accused-appellants for the offences under Sections 498-A and 304-B, I. P. C. and sentenced each of them to undergo simple imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs. 200. 00 and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 304-B, I. P. C. and three years rigorous imprisonments and a fine of Rs. 100. 00 and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one months simple imprisonment for the offence under S. 498-A, I. P. C. It is against this judgment dated 12-3-91, convicting and sentencing the accused-appellants that they have preferred this appeal. ( 3 ) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that there is no evidence available on record connecting the accused-appellants with the crime. It has further been contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the ingredients of the offences under Sections 498-A and/or 304-B, I. P. C. are not made-out and it has not been conclusively proved that the appellants subjected deceased Smt. Sharda to cruelty or harassment and the death of Smt. Sharda, though unnatural, cannot be said to be one of the dowry deaths. The learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, have supported the judgment passed by the Court below and have submitted that the death of Smt. Sharda occurred within seven years of her marriage and she had been subjected to cruelty and harassment by the appellants for the demand of a Maruti car as dowry and as the death of Sharda resulted otherwise than in the normal circumstances, therefore, it raises a presumption of dowry death. ( 4 ) I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone-through the record of the case. ( 4 ) I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone-through the record of the case. ( 5 ) ACCORDING to Section 304-B, I. P. C. , where the death of a woman occurs otherwise than in the normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or relatives of her husband, for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called a dowry death and such husband and/or the relatives of the husband, shall be deemed to have caused her death. The explanation to Section 304-B, I. P. C. provides that for the purpose of Section 304-B, dowry has the same meaning as given in Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. As per Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, dowry means any property or valuable security given or agreed to be given directly or indirectly : (a) by one party to a marriage to the other party to the marriage; or (b) by the parents of either party to a marriage or by any other person, to either party to the marriage, or to any other person, at or before or any time after the marriage, in connection with the marriage of the said parties, but does not include dower or Mehr in the cases of persons to whom the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) applies. Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act makes a provision for the presumption as to the dowry death and states that when the question is, whether the person has committed the dowry death of a woman and is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment in connection with any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person has caused the dowry death. ( 6 ) BOTH these provisions, i. e. , Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act, have been inserted in the respective Acts in order to combat the impeding menace of dowry death. ( 6 ) BOTH these provisions, i. e. , Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act, have been inserted in the respective Acts in order to combat the impeding menace of dowry death. For the purpose of proving the offence against the accused-appellants under Section 304-B, I. P. C. , the prosecution has, thus, to establish the following essential facts, namely : (i) the death of the woman has been caused otherwise than under normal circumstances; (ii) such death has occurred within seven years of her marriage; and (iii) deceased Smt. Sharda must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by the appellants and such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with the demand of dowry. So far as the first two ingredients are concerned, there is no dispute. The death of Smt. Sharda occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances. She died due to drinking of insecticide. PW 3 Dr. Brij Bhushan Gupta has stated that the cause of death of Smt. Sharda, on postmortem, was asphyxia which occurred due to spray poison. The visceras were taken from the stomach of the deceased and on chemical examination, the portions of visceras, taken from the stomach of the deceased, gave positive tests for the presence of indosulphan insecticide. The marriage of Smt. Sharda with accused Atma Ram took place on 21-4-86. Thus, her death was caused otherwise than in the normal circumstances within the period of seven years of her marriage. Thus, the first two ingredients of the offence under Section 304-B, IPC are proved. ( 7 ) WHETHER Smt. Sharda was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the appellants and the cruelty and harassment were for or in connection with the demand of dowry, these questions are to be seen in the light of the evidence and the circumstances produced by the prosecution. To prove these two ingredients, the prosecution has produced PW 4 Dharamveer - the maternal uncle of deceased, PW 5 Banwari Lal - the father of the deceased, PW 6 Anil Kumar - the brother of the deceased - and PW 7 Uda Ram the maternal grand-father of the deceased. To prove these two ingredients, the prosecution has produced PW 4 Dharamveer - the maternal uncle of deceased, PW 5 Banwari Lal - the father of the deceased, PW 6 Anil Kumar - the brother of the deceased - and PW 7 Uda Ram the maternal grand-father of the deceased. These witnesses, during their statements in the Court, have stated that the demand of Maruti car as dowry, was made by all the three appellants as well as by Prithvi Singh and Agrasen Singh - the two brothers-in-laws of the deceased. Prithvi Singh and Agrasen Singh were not found connected with the crime and against them no charge-sheet was submitted and, therefore, it is not necessary to consider their cases. All these witnesses, though stated in the Court regarding the demand of Maruti car as dowry item, by these appellants in the Panchayat as well as earlier times, also, but in their statements, recorded under Section. 161, Cr PC, they have assigned this part of demanding Maruti car in the panchayat as well as at the earlier stage, by accused-appellants Gordhan and Atma Ram only. At the earlier stage, they have nowhere stated that Moharan Devi was, also, a party for demanding the Maruti car. When these witnesses were confronted from their earlier statements, they gave the explanation that they stated so before the police but the police has not recorded the same in their earlier statements. The prosecution, therefore, has tried to make improvement from its earlier version by involving appellant Moharan Devi on this aspect of the case. They have made this improvement in order to involve her, also, in the crime. These witnesses have, thus, tried to make improvement in their earlier statements. An accused cannot be convicted on the basis of the evidence of such witnesses where the witnesses have made an improvement in their statements during the trial and have not implicated the accused at the earlier stage. The involvement of accused-appellant Moharan Devi with respect to the demand of dowry has not been established by the prosecution beyond a reasonable manner of doubt. But so far as the involvement of the appellants Gordhan Ram and Atma Ram is concerned, that stands established from the evidence of PW 4 Dharamveer, PW 5 Banwarilal, PW 6 Anil Kumar and PW 7 Uda Ram. But so far as the involvement of the appellants Gordhan Ram and Atma Ram is concerned, that stands established from the evidence of PW 4 Dharamveer, PW 5 Banwarilal, PW 6 Anil Kumar and PW 7 Uda Ram. Smt. Sharda was harassed by these two accused-appellants for the demand of a Maruti car as dowry and on account of this harassment and cruelty she took insecticide, which resulted in her death under the abnormal circumstances. The prosecution, therefore, has been able to prove all the necessary ingredients of the offence under Section 304-B, IPC so far as appellants Gordhan Ram and Atma Ram are concerned, but failed to prove the case against appellant Moharan Devi beyond reasonable manner of doubt. Appellant Moharan Devi, therefore, deserves to be acquitted of the offence under Section 403-B, IPC. ( 8 ) THE next question, which requires consideration in the present case is whether the prosecution has been able to prove the case against the accused-appellants for the offence under Section 498-A, IPC ? The essential ingredients of the offence under Section 498-A, IPC are that the woman is subjected to cruelty by the husband or the relatives of the husband. cruelty, according to Section 498-A, IPC, means any willful 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 the life, limb etc. , whether mental or physical, or harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to forcing her or any person related to her, to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or on account of failure to her or any relative to meet such demand. It has come in the evidence of PW 4 Dharamveer, PW 5 Banwari Lal, PW 6 Anil Kumar and PW 7 Uda Ram that the two accused-appellants, namely, Gordhan Ram and Atma Ram, demanded Maruti car from the parents of deceased Sharda as dowry and harassed her to such an extent that she committed suicide by drinking insecticide. The evidence of these witnesses, thus, proves beyond reasonable manner of doubt that the appellants Gordhan Ram and Atma Ram made a demand for a Maruti car as dowry item. This evidence further shows that deceased Sharda was subjected to cruelty within the meaning of Section 498-A, IPC and she ultimately committed suicide. The evidence of these witnesses, thus, proves beyond reasonable manner of doubt that the appellants Gordhan Ram and Atma Ram made a demand for a Maruti car as dowry item. This evidence further shows that deceased Sharda was subjected to cruelty within the meaning of Section 498-A, IPC and she ultimately committed suicide. The ingredients of Section 498-A, IPC, therefore, stand established against the accused-appellants Gordhan Ram and Atma Ram. But so far as appellant Moharan Devi is concerned, the prosecution has failed to prove the case under Section 498-A, IPC, against her as there is no evidence against her that she ever made any demand for a Maruti car as dowry. Even from the evidence of these witnesses, it has been clearly established that earlier to the demand for a Maruti car, which was made two months before, no such demand was made by the accused party from the complainant side. Appellant Moharan Devi, therefore, deserves to be acquitted of this offence, also. But so far as the other two appellants, viz. , Gordhan Ram and Atma Ram, are concerned, the appeal filed by them deserves to be dismissed as the prosecution has been able to prove the case against these two appellants beyond reasonable manner of doubt. ( 9 ) IN the result, the, appeal, filed by appellant Moharan Devi, is allowed and she is acquitted of all the charges levelled against her. She is on bail and she need not surrender. Her bail-bonds are discharged. The appeal, filed by appellants Gordhan Ram and Atma Ram, is hereby dismissed. The articles of dowry, recovered by the police from the possession of the accused-appellants vide Ex. P 15. Ex. P. 16 and Ex. P. 17 may be returned to PW 5 Banwari Lal - the father of the deceased. Order accordingly.