JUDGMENT B. N. P. SINGH, J. : - The deceased Zalibun Nisha wedded to the appellant, died in her matrimonial house otherwise, than in normal circumstances, allegedly for failure of her parents to make provision of sufficient dowry to them. The brother of the deceased shortly on receipt of information about tragic end of his sister, informed his mother and visited village Reriwar. He noticed his sister dead, with scratches on the neck, and entire body having swollen and it seemed to him that his sister had been killed for their failure to make provision of sufficient dowry to in-laws, and for which she was beaten in the house. A police case had been registered on these accusations and investigation commenced and on conclusion of which, the police laid charge-sheet before the court. In eventual trial, that commenced, the State examined altogether nine witnesses including maker of fardbeyan, the doctor and other witnesses. 2. The defence of the appellant both before the court below and this court had been that of total innocence and he ascribed his false implication. However, the trial court while rejecting the plea of innocence of the appellant recorded finding of guilt and sentenced him in the manner which is impugned in this appeal. 3. Though narratives made by the witnesses have been fairly spelt out in the judgment of the court below, for appreciation of contentions raised, at bar, narratives are being discussed with brevity. To begin with the exercise of analysing evidence of witnesses, one may notice that the material allegations attributed to the in-laws including the appellant as transpiring in the earliest version of the brother of the deceased, are conspicuously wanting in their evidence which they made at trial Md. Akhtar P.W.3, brother of the deceased, who happens to be the maker of fardbeyan states at trial that though he noticed his sister dead, but could not know cause of death, and as for relation of the deceased with in-laws, the witness states that she had very cordial relation with them. Needless to say that the narrations made by the witness was not in conformity with earliest version and when his attention had been drawn, he emphatically refuted suggestion about suppressing his earliest version. Needless to say that the narrations made by the witness was not in conformity with earliest version and when his attention had been drawn, he emphatically refuted suggestion about suppressing his earliest version. Similar narrations were made by Mushtaque Ahmad P.W. 2 also, who happens to be the brother of the deceased, and for relation of the deceased with her-in-laws, the witness states that the relation was cordial. The narration made by Md. ibrar P.W. 1 was almost in similar vein and term which does riot disclose incriminating evidence operating adverse to the appellant or in-laws Abdul Ghafoor P.W. 4, Abdul Hamid P.W. 5, Ramji Yadav PW. 6 and Bakridan Mian PW. 7 though stated about death of Zaibun Nisha, but did not narrate any torture and atrocities meted out to the deceased by in-laws shortly, preceding her death and that too for demand of dowry. Uma Shankar Prasad P.W. 8 was quite formal and there was nothing material in his evidence to merit consideration. 4. Though positive finding recorded by doctor who carried autopsy over the dead body of the deceased explicitly shows fracture of sternum in the middle of chest, ant, death in his estimation due to heavy pressure over chest wall which was sufficient to cause death, the doctor has ruled out presence of mark of injury or scratches on the neck. 5. Two fold contentions were raised on behalf of the appellant, and one of them was that though brother of the deceased who was maker of fardbeyan states about scratches on the neck of the deceased, no such finding was ever recorded by the doctor, who held autopsy over the dead body of the deceased Second limb of argument canvassed at bar on behalf of the appellant was that though deceased was shown to have died in-laws house, there was complete paucity of evidence that soon before her death, deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the appellant or any relative of him, and such cruelty or harassment was in connection with demand of dowry, to attract mischief of Section 304 B of the Indian Penal Code. Since these ingredients, which happen to be significant factor to fasten guilt on the appellant, is conspicuously wanting on the record. Since these ingredients, which happen to be significant factor to fasten guilt on the appellant, is conspicuously wanting on the record. I am afraid that finding of the doctor about injury on the body of the deceased alone would form basis for recording conviction under Section 304 B of the Indian Penal Code. It seems that the trial court has not properly and objectively assessed the probative value of testimony of witnesses, and due to which serious infirmity that has crept in the prosecution evidence, remained unnoticed and hence I find that finding of guilt and sentence recorded by the court below, is unsustainable. 6. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the finding recorded by the court below is set aside and the appellant is acquitted of the charges levelled against him and he is also discharged from the liability of bail bonds. Since the appellant is shown to be in custody, he be set free at once, if not wanted in any other case.