JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed by Daiip Singh appellant against the judgment and order dated 24.2.1997 whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Post Alwar held the appellant guilty of the offence under sections 304B & 498 IPC and convicting him therefor sentenced him to ten years R.l. under section 304B and three years R.l. and fine of Rs. 500/- under section 498-A IPC.Facts relevant & sufficient to dispose off the present appeal are these:- 2. Smt. Arbeli Kuer (25), the deceased was married to the appellant some times in the year 1993-94. She died of asphyria by ante-mortem drowning at her husbands house at Livari on 2.1.1996. Her abnormal death was reported to the Station House Officer (SHO) at Police Station, Sadar, Alwar on 3.1.196 by her father Makhan Singh R/o village Sadpuri under Police Station Nagar, Distt. Bharatpur. In the written report Ex.D. 1 it was alleged that the appellant and other members of his family used to harras and treat the deceased with cruelty to meet their unlawful demand for Motor cycle, Television etc. and that such demand for dowry and that such demand for dowry had been made by them on 27.12.95 when she was turned of her merital house & came to her parental house. It was also alleged that on 1.1.96 the appellant had himself visited informants house where he had made demand for the above- mentioned property. Makhan Singh further stated in the report that on 1.1.96 Smt. Harbeli Kuer was sent to her in-laws house alongwith applicant's aunt but in the following morning Vazir Singh R/o Sadpuri informed him that the appellant and other members of his family had beaten the deceased for demand for dowry and thrown her thereafter in the well. The SHO registered crime No. 7/96 under section 304B, 498A IPC on the basis of this report and after completing the investigation submitted a police report under section 170/173 Cr.PC. against the appellant and three other members of his family. After conducting the trial of all the four accused the learned Addl. Sessions Judge acquitted the other three accused in the case of the charges under sections 304B, 498A IPC but convicted & sentenced the present appellant in the manner stated above. 3. Mr. against the appellant and three other members of his family. After conducting the trial of all the four accused the learned Addl. Sessions Judge acquitted the other three accused in the case of the charges under sections 304B, 498A IPC but convicted & sentenced the present appellant in the manner stated above. 3. Mr. A.K. Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant vehemently urged that the learned Judge did not appreciable the evidence on record in right perspective and the normally of human conduct & behaviour were overlooked. The learned counsel further submitted that howsoever grave and condenable a case of dowry death may be, the prosecution cannot succeed in "such a case without bringing the foundational incriminating facts against the accused on the record of the case and such basic facts were missing in the present case. It was pointed out by Mr. Gupta that the definition of the term dowry" in the Dowry Publication Act, 1961 does not embrace within disambit the demand for any property, if at all made in a cases of which never made in the present case, made subsequent to the marriage. 4. The learned counsel for the prosecution submitted that a "dowry death" which is the position in the present case, is not only the height of atrocity against an innocent and helpless married lady but also exhibits the height of greed and animal-nature on the part of perpetrators of such a crime of therefore such cases were required to the approached with the sensitively like the cases of sexual assaults on girls and women. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that in the present case the prosecution has successfully proved the guilt of the appellant with cogent, reliable and trustworthy evidence & therefore, these should be no valid reasons to disturb the judgment under appeal. 5. "Dowry Death", as has rightly been urged by the learned counsel for the complainant and the public prosecutor for the State, is a grave offence which is committed not only against an innocent and helpless married lady but also against the society at large. Accusation of such a ghostly crime, when made, are required to be thoroughly examined in the conduct of the realities & conditions prevailing in our society keeping in mind the degradation of moral values which seems to have over taken our still educationally immature society. Accusation of such a ghostly crime, when made, are required to be thoroughly examined in the conduct of the realities & conditions prevailing in our society keeping in mind the degradation of moral values which seems to have over taken our still educationally immature society. Therefore, cases involving such brutal crimes are required to be approached with all sensitivity and sensibility. But in doing that emotions and sentiments, which are likely to over-take a person in such cases, are not to be allowed to take over the mind and pen of the judge. The right of the accused to live with liberty, unless such right is curtailed by due process of law, which process includes the proof of his guilt beyond doubt, has to be respected and the benefit of doubt, which should not be the doubt of a doubling Thomas or of a weak mind, should not be deemed to him. 6. In the instant case, the prosecution examined 23 witnesses in all to prove the charges for offences under sections 498A & 304B IPC against the appellant. These 23 witnesses may be placed in three categories. In the first category fall the witnesses who are residents of village Liwari. Such witnesses are PW 1 Asooda Singh, PW Umrao Singh, PW Dhakan Singh, PW 4 Sanwal Singh. PW 5 Smt. Banti Kuer & PW 6 Smt. Sita Kuer. The second category comprises of the witnesses who are residents of village Sadpuri. Those witnesses are PW 7 Makhan Singh PW 8, Hakam Singh, PW 9 Nana Khan, PW 10 Bachan Singh PW 12 Vazir Singh, PW 14 St. Kamlesh, PW 15 Mohan Singh and PW 23 Smt. Sheela Bai. Rest of the witnesses include PW 11 Pritam Singh, a witness to the seizure of the dead body of the deceased, PWW 13 Dr. Amar Singh Rathod, who conducted the autopsy on the dead body of me deceased, PW 18 Bhagwan Dass, PW 19 Harbans Singh, PW 20 Labh Singh & PW 21 Arbana Arora, witnesses to the "Panchnama Nash", PW 17 Pyare Lal, Head Moharrir Malkhana at Police Station Sadar or who kept and carried the views of the deceased to the State Forensic Sciences Laboratory, Rajasthan, Jaipur in sealed condition and PW 16 Sandeep Singh Dy.S.P and PW 22 Budh Ram ASI, the two investigating officers in the case. They may be placed in the third category. They may be placed in the third category. In so far as the marriage of Smt. Arbeli, deceased with the appellant and her death occurring otherwise than under abnormal circumstances at her in-laws house at village Liwari' within seven years of her marriage with the appellant is concerned, there is no dispute between the parties over those points. It is established on record from the statements of all the witnesses, residents of village Liwari & the witnesses to the seizure of the dead body and the panch witnesses that the dead body of Smt. Arbeli had been taken out of the village-well in the morning hours of January 2, 1996. PW 13 Dr. Amar Singh Rathod has opined that the deceased had died of asphyria caused by ante-mortem drowning. A lacerated wound on the left fore arm of the deceased was no doubt observed by Dr. Rathod but he opined that injury could have been caused to the deceased by her forearm striking against a stone or other hard object. It is in evidence that the well was located in the village and, as is gathered from the site-map proved at the trial, it formed part of the outer boundary of a residential house. It is a matter of common experience that wells in villages are built with pucca bricks on some-what higher levels so that man & animals may not fall therein in the day or in the night. Sustaining the lacerated wound by the deceased, on her forearm's striking against the pucca walls of the well in the course of her following into the well, is a reasonable possibility and, therefore, from this injury it cannot be legitimately of reasonably inferred that and violence was used against the deceased before her falling into the well. 7. The crux of dispute between the parties however, is whether the deceased had been subjected to any harassment or cruelty on account of demand for dowry soon before her death by asphyxia caused by her drowning in the well. 7. The crux of dispute between the parties however, is whether the deceased had been subjected to any harassment or cruelty on account of demand for dowry soon before her death by asphyxia caused by her drowning in the well. In this behalf the consistent and unanimous version given by the witnesses of the first category, who all held from village Liwari, is that the deceased and the appellant used to leave separately from the rest of the members of the family and that the deceased was never harassed by any body on account of demand for dowry and that almost all the ladies in the village draw drinking water from the well in question. All these witnesses have accepted the possibility of slipping of the feet of the deceased while making preparation to draw the water. This possibility of slipping of the feet of the deceased is sought to be strengthened by the fact that the earthen pitcher and a can (balti) with a rope were found kept at the well and it is no bodys case that the pitcher and the balti had subsequently been placed there by the appellant or other member of his family. That could have also not been done unless the deceased was forcibly brought to the well in the night and her abductors would have carried the pitcher and the balti to be left on the well. In that situation the deceased would vatiraly raise an alarm attracting the villagers to her rescue. Since a possibility is, the therefore, ruled out. The other possibility could be that a depressed Arbeli had gone to the well with a pitcher and a balti to draw water and at the well she might have been taken over by the moments of highest depression and in those unfortunate moments she might have taken the wrong decision of ending her martal existence, after keeping the pitcher and the balti at the well. Such a possibility may admits of element of harassment and cruel treatments of the deceased. But again the witnesses from village Liwari emphatically deny of any harassment of or cruel treatment to the deceased by the appellant on account of demand for dowry. Such a possibility may admits of element of harassment and cruel treatments of the deceased. But again the witnesses from village Liwari emphatically deny of any harassment of or cruel treatment to the deceased by the appellant on account of demand for dowry. The third possibility of the fall of the deceased into the well may be that when she tried to draw water from the well, her feet slipped away due to the band of her body caused to draw the water. In this situation there may be two possibilities. One, that the deceased had just climbed over the higher level of the well and after keeping the pitcher aside by bending her body and while raising her body with the rope of the balti in her hands she slipped away. In this situation the balti with the rope may be left outside the well as while in the process of falling in the well her fold on the rope would get loosened. The other situation would be that when the deceased tried to take water from the well she lost her balance of feet into the well. In this situation the balti with the rope could have possibly also fallen into the well. What has been brought on the record of the record of the case is that the earthen pitcher and the balti with the rope were lying there on the well. The exact position of the balti and the rope, as to whether those were lying in scattered condition or kept in a regular way, is not known from the evidence on the record of the case. Be that as it may, the possibility of accidental fall of the deceased into the well, while she was in the process of drawing water from the well, cannot be reasonably ruled out altogether in the present case. 8. As against the above evidence led by the witnesses from village Liwari. Be that as it may, the possibility of accidental fall of the deceased into the well, while she was in the process of drawing water from the well, cannot be reasonably ruled out altogether in the present case. 8. As against the above evidence led by the witnesses from village Liwari. The version given- by the witnesses of the second category, who are residents of village of Sadpuri-The village of the parents of the deceased, is that the appellant and other members of his family were dissatisfied with the dowry given by the parents of the deceased to her at the time of her marriage and for that reason the deceased used to be harassed and treated with cruelty by them, that whenever the deceased used to visit her parents house at village Sadpuri she used to complaint of the acts of harassment and cruelty of the appellant and other in-laws, that her mother-in-law had asked her to bring a dowry of Rs. 1 lacs when a child was borne to the deceased, that Sohan Singh, the son of deceased brother PW 15 Mohan Singh, had brought the deceased from Liwari to Sadpuri only on 27.12.95 and thereafter the appellant had gone to Sadpuri in the night of 31.12.95 or on 1.1.1996 and had demanded a Motor cycle and a television, that on leaving the house of his in-laws in the following morning the appellant had asked the deceased and her parents to send the deceased to his village Liwari alongwith his aunt, that the deceased had been so sent on 1.1.1996 with the aunt of the appellant, that on 21.1.1996 PW 12-Vazir Singh informed PW 7 Makhan Singh, father, PW 8 Hakam Singh & PW 15 Mohan Singh, the brothers, PW 14 Kamlesh, the bhabhi and PW 23 Smt. Sheela Bai, the mother of the deceased that Smt. Arbeli had been beaten by the appellant and other members of his family & thrown away into the well, that on the receipt of such information PW 7 Makhan Singh, . PW 8 Hakam Singh & PW 15 Mohan Singh went to Liwari but by that time Smt. Arbeli had died and her dead body was being taken out by the well with the help of ropes, that thereafter PW 7 Makhan Singh reached the court compounded, got a report typed there and delivered the same to the police station. PW 8 Hakam Singh & PW 15 Mohan Singh went to Liwari but by that time Smt. Arbeli had died and her dead body was being taken out by the well with the help of ropes, that thereafter PW 7 Makhan Singh reached the court compounded, got a report typed there and delivered the same to the police station. This version has been accepted by the learned trial judge as true and disclosing the essential ingredients of the offences punishable under section 498A & 304B IPC. To stress upon her point of view the learned judge has extracted several portions from the statements of the witnesses. 9. Of the witnesses of this category PW 7 Makhan Singh, PW 8 Hakam Singh, PW 14 Smt. Kamlesh, PW 15 Mohan Singh & PW 23 Smt. Sheela Bai are the Kith & Kins of the deceased from her parental house at Sadpuri. These witnesses have not doubt stated that the appellant and other members of his family used to harass and treat the deceased with cruelty on account of demand for dowry but such a statement was not supported by their natural and normal conduct. Had that been a fact the witnesses could have taken some steps in that direction at the relevant time. They would have called a panchayat of the biradri or at least a gathering of the common relations. They could have the least occasion themselves to have witnessed the acts of the alleged harassment & cruelty of the appellant & other members of his family towards Smt. Arbeli deceased. It may be pointed out that on receipt of the information of the unnatural death of the deceased 2.1.1996 the lady witnesses are not stated in the FIR Ex.D. 1 to have rushed to the village of the appellant. Such would have been the normal conduct of those witnesses. Then, Makhan Singh, the father of the deceased, is himself a signatory to the Panchnama and at that time he did not alter a single word about the harassment and cruel treatment with the deceased. As against it, Makhan Singh exhibited somewhat an abnormal conduct of an aggrieved father in not directly approaching the police promptly but first going to the court compound, getting a written-typed report prepared there and then delivering the same to the police officers. The statement of these witnesses could not have been accepted on their face-value. As against it, Makhan Singh exhibited somewhat an abnormal conduct of an aggrieved father in not directly approaching the police promptly but first going to the court compound, getting a written-typed report prepared there and then delivering the same to the police officers. The statement of these witnesses could not have been accepted on their face-value. 10. PW 9 Nana Khan & PW 10 Bachan Singh are the two witnesses from village Sadpuri who were examined as independent witnesses. Nana Khan has not supported the prosecution version and has been declared hostile. He has not stated any incriminating facts against the appellant. Therefore, his testimony affords no help to the prosecution case.PW 10 Bachan Singh has stated that he had heard that the deceased used to be harassed by the appellant on account of demand for dowry. This evidence is hearing & hence inadmissible in evidence. He has further stated that on 1.1.96 he had gone to the house of PW 7 Makhan Singh and at that time the appellant and PW 9 Nana Khan were there. Both deny that fact. He has further stated that Makhan Singh told him that the appellant had beaten Smt. Arbeli and was demanding a Motor Cycle and a golden chain, that he talked to the appellant who then left without taking Smt. Arbeli with him, that on the following day appellant's mother's sister came to the village and she took Smt. Arbeli with her to appellant's village and that on the third day he heard hue & cries coming from the house of Makhan Singh over the death of Smt. Arbeli. This version cannot be accepted for certain obvious reasons. One, he has not an eye-witness, to any beating by the appellant to Smt. Arbeli. Two, Smt. Arbeli, did not herself make any statement to him about her having been beaten by the appellant. Three, the appellant made on confession of his alleged culpable act to the witness. Four, he could not even tell the name of the alleged mother's sister of the appellant who had taken Smt. Arbeli with her to the village of the appellant. Five, according to the witness the so-called Mausi" of the appellant had come to the village from Bombay on the following day and it was on the next day that the information of the Albelis death had reached the village Sadpuri. Five, according to the witness the so-called Mausi" of the appellant had come to the village from Bombay on the following day and it was on the next day that the information of the Albelis death had reached the village Sadpuri. Other witnesses stated that the appellant had asked his in-laws to sent Smt. Albeli to his village and that the "Mausi" from Bombay had taken her to village Liwari. If the version given by these witnesses is to be accepted then the death of Smt. Arbeli should take place not before 3.1.96 but she undisputedly died on 2.1.96 as is also supported by the autopsy conducted on her dead body on 4.1.96. In fact the evidence of bringing the deceased from village Liwari on 27.12.95 to village Sadpuri and then visit of the appellant to village Sadpuri on 1.1.96 or 31.12.95 and thereafter Arbeli going with the so-called Mausi to village Liwari is noticed to have been introduced to prove the fact that soon before her death the deceased was harassed or treated with cruelty on account of demand for dowry, a fact which makes an essential ingredient of the offence under section 304B IPC. This view of the facts gets support from other evidence on record and the conduct of the prosecution. 11. PW 12 Vazir Singh is a resident of village Sadpuri. He is a "granthi" by profession and receipts the v. from the holy "guru-granth Sahib" in village. He stated that on 31.12.95 he had gone to recite the holy verses at Gurugranth Colony, 1/2kilometre away from village Liwari and on return therefrom on 3.1.96 to village Liwari he heard about the missing of Smt. Arbeli and saw the people having gathered at a well wherefrom the dead body of Arbeli was taken out. The witness further stated that, thereafter, he had returned to his village Sadpuri but did neither see Makhan Singh, Mohan Singh or Pritam Singh in the village nor did he have an talk with them. He was declared hostile but noting useful could be extracted by the prosecution on cross-examining him. He was the witnesses who was alleged to have informed PW 7 Makhan Singh about the death of his daughter Smt. Arbeli and on whose information the witnesses alleged to have left for village Liwari. The evidence led by this witness does not support them at all. 12. He was the witnesses who was alleged to have informed PW 7 Makhan Singh about the death of his daughter Smt. Arbeli and on whose information the witnesses alleged to have left for village Liwari. The evidence led by this witness does not support them at all. 12. The so-called "Mausi" could have been the person to have given independent corroboration to the version of the witness of the second category but even her name was not disclosed by the witnesses. Similarly, Sohan Singh, brother's son of the deceased, was alleged to have taken Smt. Albeli from her in-laws house to village Sadpuri on 27.12.95. Neither of these two witnesses appear to have been examined under section 161 CrPC. in the course of investigation or even cited as witnesses in the charge-sheet. Both these witnesses were quite material and had they been actually the witnesses of the facts alleged to have been done by that, they would have been examined by the prosecution at the trial. 13. Looking to the above probative value of the prosecution witnesses examined in this case, the trial Judge was herself not satisfied with the worth of their testimonies and that was why she did not believe their version as against the other co-accused in the case, who were the brothers and bhabhi of the appellant. Though the mother-in-law of the deceased was stated to have been instrumental to the alleged harassment of cruel treatment of the deceased by the appellant and other members of his family, yet she was not even made a co-accused in the case. 14. The essential ingredients of the offence under section 498A IPC are (i) the relationship of the deceased with the accused as wife or wife of the relatives and (ii) the subjecting of the accused to cruelty by him or them similarly, the essential ingredients of the offence punishable under section 304B IPC are (i) death of the deceased by bodily injury or burns or occurring otherwise than under normal circumstances, (ii) within seven years of her marriage, (iii) of her being subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband, (iv) such cruelty or harassment is for or in connection with, any demand for dowry. In the instant case though the relationship of the appellant with the deceased as his wife and the death of her marriage with the appellant under abnormal circumstances stood proved yet the other essential ingredients of her subjection by the appellant or his relatives to cruelty or harassment and that too for or in connection with any demand for dowry were not proved by cogent and reliable evidence. It is, therefore, held in the totality of circumstances of this case that the prosecution failed to prove either of the two charges against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt and therefore, the appellant is entitled to the benefit of doubt. This court reserves its opinion on the definition of "dowry" as was pressed by Mr. Gupta in the course of his arguments. 15. In the result the impugned judgment and order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge in this case is set aside and the appellant acquitted of the offences under section 498A & 304B IPC. He is in jail, he shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.> Petition allowed. *******