Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 149 (HP)

RAM KRISHAN v. STATE OF H. P.

2003-06-12

M.R.VERMA, R.L.KHURANA

body2003
JUDGMENT R.L. Khurana, J.—The appellant, Ram Krishan, hereinafter referred to as the accused, stands convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi, in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 1999 vide judgment dated 30.6.2001 for the offences under Sections 498-A, 302 and 201, Indian Penal Code. Consequent upon such conviction, he has been sentenced as under:— Offence Sentence imposed 498-A IPC Rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 3,000. In default of payment of fine, simple imprisonment for six months. 302 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 3,000. In default of payment of fine, simple imprisonment for six months. 201 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1,000. In default of payment of fine, simple imprisonment for three months. The three substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Prosecution story, in brief, may be thus stated. The Smt. Dimple was the daughter of PW 1 Prem Singh of village Bhadwar, Tehsil Thunag, District Mandi. She was married to the accused in October 1997. She was blessed with a daughter about a year after marriage. She died on 10.12.1998. 3. On coming to know about the death of his daughter, PW 2 Prem Singh on 10.12.1998 at about 3 p.m. lodged a report at Police Station Gohar in the following terms : "I am working as a Fitter on daily rated basis with I.P.H. department at Jhanjehli. Today at about 11.30 a.m. I have received a telephonic message that my daughter Dimple Kumari wife of Ram Kishan resident of village Jaul, whose marriage I had performed about a year back has suddenly died this morning. My daughter Dimple had given birth to a daughter about three months back. On receiving the information about the death of my daughter, I have come straight to the Police Station. I want to know the cause of death of my daughter Dimple. Action may be taken." 4. The above report was recorded by PW 20 Sub-Inspector Lot Ram, the then Station House Officer of Police Station, Gohar in the Daily Diary at Serial No. 17, copy of which is Ex. PW I/A. After recording the report, PW 20 accompanied by one Head Constable, two male and one lady constable went to the house of the accused". The above report was recorded by PW 20 Sub-Inspector Lot Ram, the then Station House Officer of Police Station, Gohar in the Daily Diary at Serial No. 17, copy of which is Ex. PW I/A. After recording the report, PW 20 accompanied by one Head Constable, two male and one lady constable went to the house of the accused". He carried out the inquest proceedings, took into possession the dead body of the deceased and sent the same to Zonal Hospital Mandi for post mortem. PW 9 Dr. Jiva Nand carried out the post mortem on 11.12.1998. He observed as under:— "On examination, I found healthy body of female who was wearing brown half sleeve sweater, brown Checkdar shirt and Pajama, in the mouth, teeth were tightly clenched, eyes closed. Rigor mortis is fully developed state broken at places due to handling of the body. There was blood stained white froth from both nostrils in a moderate amount. The face is cynosed around nose tip with tip of nose whitish and there was swelling around whole face and lips with dark brown discolouration of face. Skin was wrinkled over face, eyes forehead, cheeks pinkish at places. There was irregular abrasions on centre of both lips lying transversely with some clotted blood over both abrasions. Tongue lying inside clenched teeth. The hypostasis of purple brown colour present over face, neck, upper part of breast, back and hip, over thigh and right arm upto wrist in patches, fixed, hypostasis was also present in both ear labulus. The hairs were wet, soft and oily. There was one superficial linear abrasion over right wrist dorsolateral aspect near styloid process 10 x 3 cm. wide with rounded weakly defined margin which are faint brownish with yellow white base appears to be peri-mortem or post-mortem injury in nature. One half 1/2 x 1/2 cm. x half cm. grazed abrasion on left iliac crest dark brown in colour. Sclap hairs were wet, oily with no external injury any where over the scalp. Skill and brain tissue appears Normal. Breast was engorged, distended within normal limits of Breast feeding stage. Both pleurae congested. Larynx and trachea containing blood stained froth. Both lungs were congested, brownish oozing blood stained huge froth on cut section. Pericardium Normal. Heart was dilated full of fluid blood in all chambers. Large vessels were also containing fluid blood. Skin of the abdominal wall normal. Breast was engorged, distended within normal limits of Breast feeding stage. Both pleurae congested. Larynx and trachea containing blood stained froth. Both lungs were congested, brownish oozing blood stained huge froth on cut section. Pericardium Normal. Heart was dilated full of fluid blood in all chambers. Large vessels were also containing fluid blood. Skin of the abdominal wall normal. Walls slightly distended at epigastrium. Peritoneum was normal. Mouth was clinched at teeth, lips lying apart with slight swelling of with both lips, dark brown in colour. Stomach was fully distended containing chocolate coloured watery fluid and gases. Fluid was 100-200 c.c. Mucosa shows multiple petechial haemorrhage spots at different places. Small and large intestines were empty. Liver, spleen and body kidneys were congested. Bladder was empty. Organs of generation external and internal were normal, public hairs were normal. No external or internal vaginal injury. Uterus was reduced in size 3 to 4 cm. and empty." 5. No final opinion as to the cause of death was given by PW 9. He reserved his opinion till the receipt of the report of the Chemical Examiner to whom the viscera of the deceased was sent. 6. On 15.12.1998, PW 20 Sub-Inspector Lot Ram recorded the statement (Ex. PW1/B) of PW 1 Prem Singh under Section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure and on the basis of such statement a case for the offences under Sections 306 and 498-A, Indian Penal Code, came to be registered vide FIR No. 118 of 1998 (Ex. PW 13/A)! In such statement Ex. PW 1/B, PW 2 Prem Singh stated about the harassment and cruelty being meted to his daughter by the deceased on account of dowry and he expressed a suspicion that either his daughter unable to bear the harassment and cruelty had committed suicide or that she has been killed by the* accused. 7. On the receipt of the report of the Chemical Examiner, according to which no particle of poison was found in the viscera, PW 9 Dr. Jiva Nand recorded his final opinion on 25.2.1999 as to the cause of death of the deceased as under:— "In my opinion the deceased died due to asphyxia as a result of smothering. I.O. in this case is advised to investigate to rule out difference in homicidal/accidental smothering as the injuries on body shows homicidal smothering.” 8. Jiva Nand recorded his final opinion on 25.2.1999 as to the cause of death of the deceased as under:— "In my opinion the deceased died due to asphyxia as a result of smothering. I.O. in this case is advised to investigate to rule out difference in homicidal/accidental smothering as the injuries on body shows homicidal smothering.” 8. On the basis of the above opinion of PW 9 Dr. Jiva Nand, the case which was originally registered for the offences under Sections 306 and 498-A, Indian Penal Code, was converted into the one for the offences under Sections 498-A, 302 and 201, Indian Penal Code. The accused came to be arrested on 19.4.1999. 9. The investigation revealed that the accused used to torture and harass the deceased on account of dowry, sometime during the night intervening 9/10.12.1998 or early hours of the morning of 10.12.1998 had committed the murder of the deceased by smothering and in order to screen himself of the offence of murder had carried and thrown the dead body near a pond so as to make out a case that the deceased either had committed suicide by jumping into the pond or that she had died by having accidentally fallen into the pond. 10. On the completion of the investigation, the accused was sent up for trial. He was charged for the offences under Sections 498-A, 302 and 201, Indian Penal Code, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 11. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as twenty four witnesses. The accused in his statement recorded under Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, admitted that the deceased was his wife and that a female child was born to her. He stated that since after the birth of the child, the deceased used to feel dizzy and it appeared that she was suffering from some mental problem. On the relevant day, she had left the house for answering the call of nature and since she did not return, her father had gone in search of her and found her lying in the pool. Her upper part of the body was in water while her lower part of the body was on the bank of the pond. She was carried home and on having been got medically examined she was found to be dead. 12. Her upper part of the body was in water while her lower part of the body was on the bank of the pond. She was carried home and on having been got medically examined she was found to be dead. 12. The accused apart from himself appearing as his own witness in defence as DW 4, examined six other defence witnesses including his father. 13. The learned trial Judge on consideration of the evidence coming on record held the accused guilty of the three offences under Sections 498-A, 302 and 201, Indian Penal Code. He, accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid. Hence the present appeal by the accused assailing the conviction and sentence recorded against him by the learned trial Judge. 14. There is no denying that the accused had died an unnatural death. An unnatural death may be suicidal, homicidal or accidental. Therefore, the first question which arise for determination is whether the death of the deceased was homicidal. 15. PW 9 Dr. Jiva Nand, who conducted the post mortem has deposed that he was of the definite opinion that death was homicidal. According to him, his opinion is based on the presence of injuries on the body of the deceased. The following injuries were found on the person of the deceased by PW 9:— (i) Irregular abrasions on the centre of both lips lying transversed with clotted blood over both the abrasions; (ii) One superficial linear abrasion over right wrist dorsolateral aspect near styloid process 10 cm. x 3 cm. wide with rounded weakly defined margin which were faint brownish with yellow-white base. 16. In so far as injury No. (i) above is concerned, PW 9 has not given any opinion if the same was anti-mortem or post mortem. In respect of injury No. (ii) above, PW 9 has opined that the same appeared to be either peri-mortem or post mortem. In other words, even in the case of injury No. (ii) PW 9 has not been able to give its definite opinion. 17. It is significant to note that PW 9 on 11.12.1998 after the post mortem while reserving his final opinion as to the cause of death in his post-mortem report Ex. In other words, even in the case of injury No. (ii) PW 9 has not been able to give its definite opinion. 17. It is significant to note that PW 9 on 11.12.1998 after the post mortem while reserving his final opinion as to the cause of death in his post-mortem report Ex. PW 9/A on page 5 in the column of "Remarks if any" had recorded an advise to the investigation officer in the following words: "I.O. is advised to investigate thoroughly to rule out homicidal drowning or smothering. He should also get checked the clothes the deceased was wearing at the time of death which has been changed by the attendant." (Emphasis supplied) 18. Again on 25.2.1999 while recording his final opinion as to the cause of death of the deceased, PW 9 has reiterated an advise to the investigation officer in the following term:— "I.O. in this case is advised to investigate to rule out difference in homicidal/ accidental smothering, as the injuries on the body shows homicidal smothering." (Emphasis supplied) 19. If PW 9 was of definite opinion that the cause of death of the deceased was homicidal smothering, it is not known as to why time and again he was advising the investigation officer to investigate the case to rule out homicidal/accidental smothering. It appears that PW 9 could not arrive at a definite opinion as to whether the death of the deceased was homicidal, accidental or suicidal. It was for this reason that he wanted the investigation officer to rule out homicidal/accidental smothering. PW 9, during the course of his cross-examination, has explained: "I advised the investigation officer on both the occasions in view of the fact that in the inquest report and information supplied by the police, the findings of the post mortem examination was not in consonance with the history of the case." 20. Ex. PW 20/A is the inquest report preferred by the investigation officer, while detailing the facts of the case, the investigation officer has recorded therein As under : "During enquiry it has been found that the deceased Dimple was awaken by her mother-in-law Soma Devi at about 7 a.m. and thereafter she went out to ease herself. About 7.45 a.m. Mahendermani asked about Dimple who had not returned till then. Nobody was knowing about her. About 7.45 a.m. Mahendermani asked about Dimple who had not returned till then. Nobody was knowing about her. Mahendermani, the father-in-law of the deceased, then went out towards the nullah in search for her. He saw Dimple lying with her face downwards in a water pond at a distance of about 150 metres from the house. Then he alongwith other members of the family lifted her and carried her home. They laid her in the room and since the body of the deceased was very cold, they gave her a hot water bath." 21. Similar version is mentioned in Ex. PW 20/F, the application made by the investigation officer to the Medical Officer of Zonal Hospital Mandi requesting for conducting the post mortem of the deceased. Thus, the enquiry conducted till the body was sent for post-mortem showed that the deceased was alive till 7 a.m. on 10.12.1998 when she had left her house for answering the call of nature. 22. PW 9 Dr. Jiva Nand in his deposition during the course of cross-examination has gone to state that in his opinion the deceased was first killed and thereafter she might have been thrown in the water. However, no reasons have been given by him for his such opinion. PW 9 has admitted that the deceased was a healthy young lady and that if a young lady like the deceased was tried to be killed by homicidal smothering, she was likely to put up a strong resistance and in such circumstances she was likely to sustain injuries. As stated above, except the two abrasions in the middle of her lips and a superficial abrasion on the right wrist, no other injury was found on any part of the body of the deceased. 23. There is yet another significant aspect of the case. A perusal of para/column No. 10 of the inquest report Ex. PW 20/A shows that the investigation officer had noticed an 8" long and 1-1/2" to 2" wide burn injury on the right wrist extending upto the thumb of the deceased. Half of such injury was badly burnt. While detailing the facts of the case in Ex. ^FW 20/ A, the investigation officer has observed with regard to this burn injury as under : "Since the body of the deceased was very cold, they gave her a hot water bath. Half of such injury was badly burnt. While detailing the facts of the case in Ex. ^FW 20/ A, the investigation officer has observed with regard to this burn injury as under : "Since the body of the deceased was very cold, they gave her a hot water bath. According to them the right wrist of the deceased got burnt due to hot water which was in fact very hot." 24. The investigation officer in his application Ex. PW 20/F made to the Medical Officer for conducting the post mortem had drawn his pointed attention to the abovesaid burn injury seen on the right wrist of the deceased and had asked for opinion with regard to such burn injury. The relevant portion of Ex. PW 20/F reads:— "There was an eight inches long burn injury on the right wrist of the deceased. During enquiry it had been told that the burn injury was caused due to hot water while she was being given bath. From the enquiry and proceedings conducted, the cause of Dimples death could not be ascertained. Therefore, post mortem of the deceased is necessary to be conducted to know the cause of her death. Opinion regarding burn injury on the right wrist of the deceased may also be given as to how the burn injury has been caused and how long before the same was caused." 25. Surprisingly enough, no such burn injury, which is stated to be eight inches long and 1-1/2" to 2" wide, appears to have been noticed by PW 9 while conducting the post mortem since there is no mention about such injury either in the post mortem report Ex. PW 9/A or in the deposition made in the Court by PW 9. On the other hand PW 9 observed a superficial linear abrasion 10 cm. x 3 cm. on the right wrist of the deceased and such injury has not even been opined by PW 9 to be ante-mortem. 26. The contradiction coming in evidence as to the burn injury on the right wrist of the deceased would lead to the only inference that the versions of either PW 9 or that of PW 20 (as reflected in Ex. PW 20/A) as to the presence of burn injury on the right wrist of the deceased is false. 26. The contradiction coming in evidence as to the burn injury on the right wrist of the deceased would lead to the only inference that the versions of either PW 9 or that of PW 20 (as reflected in Ex. PW 20/A) as to the presence of burn injury on the right wrist of the deceased is false. PW 9 during the course of post-mortem had observed:— (a) Teeth of the deceased were tightly clenched; (b) Blood stained white froth from both the nostrils in a moderate amount; (c) Tongue was lying inside the clenched teeth; (d) Hypostasis of purple brown colour was present over the face, neck and upper part of the breast; (e) Both pleurae were congested; (f) Larynx and trachea contained blood stained froth; (g) Both lungs were congested and oozing blood stained huge froth; (h) Heart was dilated full of fluid blood in all chambers. Large vessels also contained fluid blood. 27. In Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology by H.W.V. Cox (sixth edition) at page 276, it has been observed that in summary, the only reliable signs of drowning found at autopsy are froth in the lungs and air passages and over-distention of the lungs, where other causes for these can be excluded. 28. In Modis Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology (22nd edition) at page 289 it has been reported that in order to determine whether death was caused by drowning, an opinion as to cause of death by drowning should be given from several of the following characteristic signs:— (1) The presence of profuse fine, white, lathery persistent froth around the mouth and the nostrils; (2) the presence of some object firmly grasped in the hands; (3) the presence of fine, white froth in the air passages; (4) the bulky and oedematous water logged lungs, which exude a copious frothy blood stained fluid on section; (5) the presence of water muds, weeds etc. in the stomach or small intestine or both. 29. Dr. K.S. Narayan Reddy in his work "Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology", First Edition, at page 406 has observed that a fine, white lathery froth or foam is seen at the mouth and nostrils, which is one of the most characteristic external sign of drowning. in the stomach or small intestine or both. 29. Dr. K.S. Narayan Reddy in his work "Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology", First Edition, at page 406 has observed that a fine, white lathery froth or foam is seen at the mouth and nostrils, which is one of the most characteristic external sign of drowning. It has further been observed that froth is usually white but may be blood stained because of slight admixture with blood from intrapulmonary bleeding and that the lungs are usually congested moderately but may be pale due to forcing out of blood from the lungs and compressing of the vessels in the internal alveolar septa by the air and water trapped in the alveoli. 30. Considering the observations made by PW 9 [as detailed at (a) to (h) above] during the course of post mortem in the light of the observations made by various authors on the subject, the possibility of the deceased having died by drowning cannot be ruled out. It is not the case of the prosecution that the accused had killed the deceased by forcibly drowning her in the pond. 31. Thus, in the present case the prosecution has not been able to conclusively prove that the deceased died a homicidal death. 32. Proceeding on the assumption that the deceased died a homicidal death, it may be at the very out set stated that there is not even an iota of evidence to link the accused with the death of the accused. 33. Admittedly, there is no direct evidence as to the murder of the deceased. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. 34. It is by now well settled that in a case based on circumstantial evidence the Court can record conviction but before doing so it must satisfy itself that the circumstances from which an inference of guilt could be drawn have been established by unimpeachable evidence led by the prosecution and that all the circumstances put together are not only of a conclusive nature but complete the chain so fully as to unerringly point only to the guilt of the accused and are not capable of any explanation which is not consistent with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. 35. 35. The learned trial Judge in convicting the accused has primarily relied upon two circumstances appearing in the evidence of the prosecution, namely, strained relations between the accused and the deceased since the deceased was being subjected to torture, harassment and cruelty by the accused on account of dowry, and, the recovery of chappels Ex. P-7 from near the place of the recovery of dead body of the deceased. 36. The story of strained relations between the accused and the deceased and that the deceased was being subjected to cruelty by the accused on account of dowry, on the facts and in the circumstances of the present case, appears to have been introduced at a subsequent stage in order to support the version that the deceased was murdered by the accused. 37. Ex. PW I/A is the first report lodged with the police by PW 1 Prem Singh, the father of the deceased regarding the death of the deceased and praying for action so that he may know the cause of death of his daughter. Though in this report, PW 1 has stated that on coming to know about the death of his daughter he had come directly to the police station for making the report, the evidence coming on the record is to the contrary The evidence led by the prosecution including the deposition of PW 1 shows that on coming to know about the death of his daughter, PW 1 and his other close relations, namely, sister-in-law (wifes sister), nephew (wifes sisters son), son-in-law, brother etc. had gone first to the house of the accused, where the dead body of the deceased was lying and after ascertaining full facts there, PW 1 Prem Singh accompanied by PW 10 Kam Raj and others had gone to the police station to lodge the report Ex. PW I/A. 38. In the report Ex. PW I/A there is no mention about the deceased being treated with cruelty by the accused either on account of dowry or on any other account. Nor in such statement PW 1 had expressed a suspicion that his daughter has been killed by the accused. 39. PW I/A. 38. In the report Ex. PW I/A there is no mention about the deceased being treated with cruelty by the accused either on account of dowry or on any other account. Nor in such statement PW 1 had expressed a suspicion that his daughter has been killed by the accused. 39. It is in the evidence of PW 6 Smt. Savitri Devi, Pradhan of Mahila Mandal Jhanjehli that on coming to know about the death of the deceased 8/10 members of the Mandal had visited the Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of Police, Mandi to impress upon them to take action in the matter. It appears that on the intervention of the Mahila Mandal and without awaiting the final opinion as to the cause of death from PW 9, the investigation officer (PW 20) accompanied by Deputy Superintendent of Police had gone to the house of PW 1 on 15.12.1998 to record his statement Ex. PW 1/B under Section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure leading to the registration of the case for the offences under Sections 498-A and 306, Indian Penal Code. It was for the first time that the story about dowry demands by the accused and the deceased being subjected to cruelty on account of dowry came to be introduced. It was also for the first time that PW 1 had expressed a suspicion that his daughter either had committed suicide unable to hear the torture and cruelty being meted out to her by the accused, or, that she might have been killed by the accused. 40. The mere fact that there was no mention of dowry demand and the deceased being subjected to cruelty on account of such demands on 10.12.1998 till 15.12.1998 and that it was only on 15.12.1998 that such a story about dowry demands was introduced for the first time and that too pursuant to the demand of Mahila Mandal, the entire story of the prosecution is rendered doubtful. 41. Even otherwise, the evidence coming on record regarding demand for dowry is most unconvincing. The only evidence coming on record is with regard to the sweater and shoes given to the accused at the time of marriage. The accused in his statement has admitted that a new sweater and a new pair of shoes were given to him. 41. Even otherwise, the evidence coming on record regarding demand for dowry is most unconvincing. The only evidence coming on record is with regard to the sweater and shoes given to the accused at the time of marriage. The accused in his statement has admitted that a new sweater and a new pair of shoes were given to him. He has explained that the sweater initially given to him was short in size while the pair of shoes given was over sized. He had returned the sweater and pair of shoes given to him initially. 42. It cannot be believed and accepted that the accused would have subjected the deceased to cruelty and would have gone to the extent of eliminating her for such trifle issue of a sweater and pair of shoes. 43. A new fact was sought to be introduced by the prosecution during the course of evidence with regard to the accused having demanded a sum of Rs. 20,000 and having forced the deceased to arrange for the same. For this purpose the prosecution has examined PW 11 Dev Dutt, a brother-in-law (sisters husband) of the deceased. PW 11 has deposed that the deceased, a month before her death, had come to him with a request to give her Rs. 20,000 as she was being forced for the same by the accused. PW 11 assured the deceased that he would talk to her husband and that he would arrange for the money in six months. 44. Significantly, PW 11 in his statement Ex. PW 11/A made to the police under Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure, has not stated about the deceased having come to him for Rs. 20,000. He had introduced such a story for the first time while deposing in Court on 21.6.2000. 45. Besides, neither the father of the deceased (PW 1) nor her mother (PW 2) nor any other relative of the deceased, examined as prosecution witnesses, has stated about such demand of Rs. 20,000 by the accused. Had there been such a demand by the accused, it would have been natural conduct on the part of the deceased to go to her parents and not to her brother-in-law in the absence of some special circumstances and reasons. 20,000 by the accused. Had there been such a demand by the accused, it would have been natural conduct on the part of the deceased to go to her parents and not to her brother-in-law in the absence of some special circumstances and reasons. Secondly, it cannot be believed that PW 11 would not have mentioned about the deceased having come to him asking for money to his parents-in-law (parents of the deceased, that is, PW 1 and PW 2). 46. PW 2 Smt. Drompti, as per her convenience, appears to have been changing her statement. It is in the evidence of PW 18 Deputy Superintendent of Police Shri Ravinder Singh, who had carried out partial investigation of the case, that the statement of PW 2 Smt. Drompti under Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded twice on 24.2.1999 and 20.12.1998 respectively and that the version given by her in her statement recorded on 24.2.1999 was different from the one given in the statement made on 20.12.1998. 47. Ex. PW 19/A is the daily diary report No. 22 recorded by PW 20 on 11.12.1998 on his return from the spot and after having sent the dead body for post mortem. It has been recorded therein that "from the investigation done till now, nothing incriminating has been found and that further action will be taken according to the circumstances." 48. It is in evidence of the prosecution that on 10.12.1998 when inquest proceedings were carried out by PW 20, the investigation officer, before sending the dead body for post mortem, inquiries were made by him from the persons present as to the cause of death of the deceased. He also recorded the statements of certain persons present there. At such time PW 1 (the father of the deceased) PW 7 (the maternal aunt of the deceased), PW 10 Kam Raj (a cousin of the deceased and son of PW 7), PW 11 Dev Dutt (sisters husband of the deceased), PW 14 Lalit Kumar and PW 16 Lalman (uncles of the deceased) were present. PW 14 Lalit Ram is one of the witnesses of the inquest report Ex.PW 20/A. It appears that none had stated anything about the deceased being subjected to cruelty by the accused on account of dowry or for any other reason. Nor any one of them had suspected any foul play in the death of the deceased. PW 14 Lalit Ram is one of the witnesses of the inquest report Ex.PW 20/A. It appears that none had stated anything about the deceased being subjected to cruelty by the accused on account of dowry or for any other reason. Nor any one of them had suspected any foul play in the death of the deceased. In fact they appear to have accepted the story and facts given to the police about the deceased having gone out in the morning to answer the call of nature and subsequent recovery of her body from the pond. 49. Much reliance was placed on the recovery of Chappels from the place near the place of recovery of the dead body. 50. No evidence has come on the record to show whether the Chappels belong to the accused or the deceased or some one else. These Chappels are shown to have been recovered on 15.12.1998. PW 14 Lalit Kumar, an uncle of the deceased, has deposed that on 10.12.1998, the date of death of the deceased, he had visited the pond area and the place from where the Chappels were recovered and that on such date no Chappels were seen/ found at the spot. If no Chappels were seen on 10.12.1998, how the same came to be recovered on 15.12.1998, has remained unexplained. 51. It is also in evidence of the prosecution itself that the funeral of the deceased had taken place on 11.12.1998 just adjacent to the place from where the Chappels are shown to have been recovered. As stated above, according to PW 14 no Chappels were seen at the spot on 10.12.1998. In view of the fact that funeral of the deceased had taken place on 11.12.1998 just adjacent to the place of recovery of Chappels, the possibility of some one attending the funeral having left the Chappels there cannot be ruled out. Besides, in the absence of evidence to link the said Chappels either with the accused or the deceased, no benefit can be derived by the prosecution therefrom. 52. From the evidence coming on record, the prosecution has not been able to bring home the offences against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. In convicting and sentencing the accused there has been complete misreading and mis-appreciation of the evidence by the learned Court below. 52. From the evidence coming on record, the prosecution has not been able to bring home the offences against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. In convicting and sentencing the accused there has been complete misreading and mis-appreciation of the evidence by the learned Court below. Therefore, the conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused by the learned trial Court cannot be sustained and the same are liable to be set aside. 53. As a result, the present appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence of the accused are set aside and he is acquitted of the offences under Sections 498-A, 302 and 201, Indian Penal Code. The accused who is presently lodged in jail undergoing sentence, be set at liberty forthwith unless required in any other case. The amount of fine, if already deposited, shall be refunded to him forthwith. The case property shall be dealt with as per the orders/directions of the learned trial Court. Appeal allowed.