S. C. DATTA, J. ( 1 ) THE convict Kalia Sethy faced trial before the learned Sessions Judge, Puri in Sessions Trial Case No. 221 of 1992 with the charges under Sections 302 and 498-A, I. P. C. He was found guilty of both the charges and had been sentenced to undergo R. I. for life under Section 302, I. P. C. but no separate sentence was awarded under Section 498-A, I. P. C. Being aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Puri the convict has preferred this appeal from Jail. ( 2 ) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that the marriage between the deceased Hema and the appellant was solemnised in the month of Chaitra, 1991. There was a demand of a sum of Rs. 1500/- in case and a Raleigh cycle as dowry which was met by the parents of the deceased. The deceased Hema was a lefthander i. e. she used to attend works by using her left hand. She was disliked by her in-laws and her husband because of her being a lefthander. Subsequently, the in-laws of the deceased as well as her husband demanded a further sum of Rs. 5,000/- from the parents of the deceased on conditions of keeping the deceased as the wife of the appellant, otherwise she would be deserted. On occasions when the deceased used to visit her patents she complained of mental and physical torture to her parents and made known the demand of Rs. 5,000/- made by her in-laws and her husband. A few days prior to the death of the deceased Nadia the brother of the accused came to the residence of parents of the deceased and requested the father of the deceased to reach the deceased to their residence since the accused had returned from Bhanjanagar where he was serving. Thereupon, the deceased was reached to the house of the accused and that is how the deceased began to live with the accused. On 30th March, 1992, the informant (P. W. 1) the father of the deceased got an information from the father of the accused, namely, Paichha Sethi that the deceased died due to drowning. Thereupon, the deceased was reached to the house of the accused and that is how the deceased began to live with the accused. On 30th March, 1992, the informant (P. W. 1) the father of the deceased got an information from the father of the accused, namely, Paichha Sethi that the deceased died due to drowning. On hearing the news the parents of the deceased hurried to the residence of the accused and noticed the dead body of deceased Hema on the tank ridge near the water and there were marks of injuries on her body. P. W. 1, the father of the deceased became suspicious and lodged a written report with the police and thus, the law was set in motion. The post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased Hema revealed that the deceased suffered a homicidal death due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation. The said report further revealed that the death was not due to drowning or it was suicidal or accidental. Charge-sheet followed after completion of investigation. ( 3 ) IN order to bring home the charges, the prosecution has examined five witnesses in all. On an analysis On an analysis of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the trial Judge found guilty of the accused under Sections 302, I. P. C. and 498-A, I. P. C. and convicted the accused as aforesaid. ( 4 ) WE have heard the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties at length. ( 5 ) ON scrutiny of the materials on record, it appears that the prosecution case rests mainly on circumstantial evidence. Before scrutinising the evidence, it would be appropriate to notice a few important facts. The deceased was married to the accused in the month of Chaitra, 1991 and she met with her tragic death in the early hours of 30th March, 1992, i. e. within one year (more or less) of the marriage. At the time of marriage, the dowry demand was fulfilled. The deceased Hema was a lefthander i. e. she used to attend to all her works by using her left hand in preference to right hand. It is in the evidence of her father (P. W. 1) that the deceased was disliked by her-in-laws and the husband as well because of her being a lefthander. They demanded a further dowry of Rs. It is in the evidence of her father (P. W. 1) that the deceased was disliked by her-in-laws and the husband as well because of her being a lefthander. They demanded a further dowry of Rs. 5,000/- in cash and threatened her that unless they meet the demand the deceased would be driven out of her matrimonial home. They also gave out that in the event the sum of Rs. 5,000/- is paid they would ignore the deficiency, meaning thereby the peculiar habit of doing works by the deceased through her left hand. We find from the evidence of the father of the deceased (P. W. 1) that quite often during her visit to her father's house the deceased complained of torture and demand of further dowry amount by her in-laws as well as by her husband. The father of the deceased (P. W. 1) could not meet the demand and pleaded with them not to cause mental torture to the deceased. It is in evidence of P. W. 1 that a few days prior to the tragic end of the deceased, Nadia the brother of the accused came to the residence of the parents of the deceased and requested them to reach the deceased to their residence on the ground that the accused had come from Bhanjanagar. Initially, P. W. 1 was reluctant to agree for fear of torture in her husband's house but later reached the deceased there. The deceased began to reside at her husband's place since then. It is not disputed that Hema the deceased died while she was staying at the residence of her husband. Nobody has of course seen the accused killing the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was found on 30th March, 1992 in the early morning when P. W. 4 a co-villager had gone out near the village tank to attend to nature's call. He noticed Hema lying dead and the accused was moving his hand over her body. We noticed from this evidence that none was present near the tank at that time. On enquiry the accused told him that Hema died due to drowning. According to this witness (P. W. 4) the accused cried while narrating the aforesaid fact. During cross-examination, this P. W. 4 says that there was no ill-feeling between the accused and the deceased and they were leading a happyconjugal life. On enquiry the accused told him that Hema died due to drowning. According to this witness (P. W. 4) the accused cried while narrating the aforesaid fact. During cross-examination, this P. W. 4 says that there was no ill-feeling between the accused and the deceased and they were leading a happyconjugal life. ( 6 ) THE learned Counsel appearing for the appellant argues that the evidence as disclosed by this witness is suggestive of the fact that the accused was not responsible for causing the death of the deceased Hema, as otherwise, he would not have noticed the accused moving her hand over the dead body of his wife and crying while narrating the incident to him. He goes on arguing that no ill-feeling existed between the parties and as such, there is not earthly reason why the accused would put an end to the life of his wife. We have noticed the background of the case. The parents of the deceased met the demands of dowry during marriage. The deceased was disliked because of her being a lefthander ever since her marriage. There was further demand of dowry with threat of desertion if the further demand for dowry is not met. The marriage was solemnised only a year back and the deceased died under a mysterious circumstance. The accused and her relations wanted to pass the death as one of accidental or suicidal. The father of the accused informed the father of the deceased that their daughter had died by drowning. The accused also told P. W. 4 in the early hours of the day that his wife died by drowning. It is of course true that the accused did not flee from the spot but was seen staying by the side of the dead body and moving his hand over the dead body of the deceased. The deceased stayed with the accused on the previous day. Nobody knows what brought the accused to the site where the dead body lay in nude condition and with multiple bleeding injuries on her body. The normal human conduct would be to raise hue and cry in such circumstances. But we do not notice any such conduct on the part of the appellant. Nobody knows what brought the accused to the site where the dead body lay in nude condition and with multiple bleeding injuries on her body. The normal human conduct would be to raise hue and cry in such circumstances. But we do not notice any such conduct on the part of the appellant. ( 7 ) LEARNED Counsel for the State urges that the accused wanted to prove his innocence by not fleeing away from the spot but taking a stand that his wife died by drowning. He submits that the medical evidence thoroughly belies the defence version of the case that Hema died by drowning. In this connection, he has taken us through the medical evidence. P. W. 2 is the Autopsy Surgeon who conducted post-mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased Hema on 31-3-1992. During post-mortem examination, the Autopsy Surgeon noticed the following external injuries :- (I) An abrasion on the left elbow of the size of 1. 5 c. m. x 1 c. m. x skin depth. The injury was looking blackish in colour;ii) Laceration of right sterno mastoid muscle at its lower part with haematoma of the size of 5. 3 c. m. ; (III) Laceration and congestion of strap muscle on the right side neck 8 c. m. x 3. 5 c. m. ; (IV) Laceration of the left side chest muscle of infra axillary area extending from 4th to 7th intercostal space and extending to muscle of posterior axillary fold with haematoma of the size of 8 c. m. x 6 c. m. The injury was looking black in colour. ( 8 ) ACCORDING to the surgeon, all the aforesaid injuries are ante-mortem. On dissection, he found the following :- (i) there were corresponding internal injuries to the aforesaid injuries Nos. (ii), (iii) and (iv); (ii) Trachea and larynx and mucus membranes were found congested; (iii) Liver, kidney and spleen were also found congested; (iv) Brain and membrane were found congested. According to him, death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation. The death was homicidal in nature and not suicidal or accidental. He states categorically that the death was not due to drowning. He rules out the possibility of the death due to drowning because of absence of - (i) froth in the nostril and the mouth; (ii) aquatic plants, muds, smell etc. The death was homicidal in nature and not suicidal or accidental. He states categorically that the death was not due to drowning. He rules out the possibility of the death due to drowning because of absence of - (i) froth in the nostril and the mouth; (ii) aquatic plants, muds, smell etc. , foreign particles in the respiratory track; (iii) the lungs were not water logged. He states further that in the event of death due to drowning, the symptoms of biting of the tongue would not have been there. This Autopsy Surgeon (P. W. 2) was examined and cross-examined at length. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant attacks the evidence of this Autopsy Surgeon on the ground that the opinion given by him is contrary to authority on the subject. He has referred to Modi's Medical Jurisprudence to contend that the death of the deceased was caused due to drowning. There is nothing to indicate that the findings arrived at by this Autopsy Surgeon is contrary to the medical jurisprudence. Theautopsy Surgeon has asserted that it is a case not of drowning but the death was caused due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation. It is hard to believe that this witness would depose falsely only to implicate the accused. A close scrutiny of the evidence would indicate that the deceased was first subjected to severe assault including blows on the chest and then done to death by throttling. It appears that the accused tried to cover up his guilt by giving out a case of drowning. The evidence of the Doctor totally disproves the case of the defence that the deceased died by drowning. On the contrary, it clearly shows that the death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation. ( 9 ) WE have noticed the background in which this young girl met with a tragic end. On a close scrutiny of the evidence on record, we are of firm opinion that it is none but the accused who is responsible for causing the death of his wife Hema. There cannot be any other hypothesis excepting the guilt of the accused. Though this is a case depending solely upon circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has been successful in establishing the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. There cannot be any other hypothesis excepting the guilt of the accused. Though this is a case depending solely upon circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has been successful in establishing the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. In that view of the matter, we find and hold that the trial Judge was perfectly justified in convicting the appellant. We find no material to upset the order of conviction and sentence. In our view, the appeal is devoid of any merit and is liable to be dismissed. ( 10 ) IN the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed. ( 11 ) A. PASAYAT, J. , I agree. Appeal dismissed. .