JUDGMENT S.N. Aggarwal, J. - Rajwati (now deceased) daughter of Ram Het, complainant (PW-9) was married to Rajinder appellant on 9.2.1992. Smt. Natho appellant is mother of said Rajinder. Smt. Rajwati was allegedly harassed for dowry demand and she was sent to her parental house with the direction to return to their house only after she fulfilled their demands. After staying with her parents for 4/5 months, she set herself on fire on 13.5.1993 in her parental house at 9.30 A.M. when she was alone in the house. She was shifted to the hospital. She remained unfit to make her statement till 16.5.1993. She was declared fit on 17.5.1993 when her statement was recorded. Ultimately she succumbed to her burn injuries on 7.6.1993. 2. The present case was registered on the statement of Ram Het, father of Rajwati on 15.5.1993. Originally, case was registered under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code, but, later on, it was converted into one under Section 304-B Indian Penal Code. 3. The accused were charged for having committed offences punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 304-B Indian Penal Code. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In support of its case, the prosecution examined ten witnesses but only material witnesses are being discussed. Dr. Suresh Arora, B.K. Hospital, Faridabad appeared as PW-1. He had conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of Rajwati on 8.6.1993. He opined that the cause of death, in this case, was septicaemia due to burns. He also proved copy of post-mortem report Exhibit PA. 5. Dr. Shashi Bala, Medical Officer, B.K. Hospital, Faridabad PW-3 has proved dying declaration of Smt. Rajwati dated 17.5.1993 Exhibit PD. It was recorded by ASI Sat Narain after the patient was declared fit to make her statement which was attested by her also. 6. Harish Ahuja, PW-7 is a neighbourer of Ram Het and he along with Tulsi and Raj Kumari, wife of Tulsi reached the place of occurrence on 13.5.1993 at about 9.30 A.M. when Rajwati had set herself on fire. He also proved that Rajwati was also uttering that she was fed up with her husband and others. Therefore, she wanted to take her life as they were torturing her for the demand of dowry. 7. Ram Het. PW-8 is the complainant who has proved his statement dated 15.5.1993, Exhibit PF and proved those facts on oath. 8. Dr. He also proved that Rajwati was also uttering that she was fed up with her husband and others. Therefore, she wanted to take her life as they were torturing her for the demand of dowry. 7. Ram Het. PW-8 is the complainant who has proved his statement dated 15.5.1993, Exhibit PF and proved those facts on oath. 8. Dr. G.K. Khurana, PW-10 had medically examined Rajwati on 13.5.1995 in B.K. Hospital, Faridabad. He proved copy of medico-legal report Exhibit PK on which he had sent information Exhibit PK/1 to the police regarding admission of Rajwati with burn injuries. 9. The prosecution evidence was closed by order by the Court dated 21.3.1996. 10. The accused were examined under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code Rajinder accused pleaded innocence and stated that Rajwati was kept in his house with love and affection. No demand of dowry was made from her nor she was harassed. Rajwati had gone to her parental house with her father where she died and he has been involved falsely. Similar plea was taken by Smt. Natho appellant. 11. In defence, the accused/appellants examined Mehkam Singh DW-1 and Hari Chand, DW-2. They are the co-villagers of the accused. They have supported the defence version. 12. On the basis of this evidence, the learned trial Court convicted the appellants vide judgment dated 19.7.1997 for having committed offence punishable under Section 304-B Indian Penal Code. They were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. Hence this appeal. 13. The record of trial Court has been perused and the submissions made at the bar by Mr. Alok Jain, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.A.G. Haryana have been considered. 14. The marriage of Rajwati with Rajinder appellant had taken place on 9.2.1992 and she had set herself on fire on 13.5.1993 and succumbed to the burn injuries on 7.6.1993. Therefore, she had died otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage. Therefore, two constituents of Section 304-B Indian Penal Code are satisfied. 15. Now, the question that arises for determination is whether she was subjected to cruelty in connection with demand of dowry soon before her death. 16. The prosecution has examined Ram Het as PW-8. He is father of Rajwati. He has clearly deposed that his daughter Rajwati was being tortured, harassed and maltreated for dowry demand soon after the marriage. 15. Now, the question that arises for determination is whether she was subjected to cruelty in connection with demand of dowry soon before her death. 16. The prosecution has examined Ram Het as PW-8. He is father of Rajwati. He has clearly deposed that his daughter Rajwati was being tortured, harassed and maltreated for dowry demand soon after the marriage. It was told to him by Rajwati when she returned from the house of her husband to her parental house. The accused had started demanding a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for the construction of their house. He sold his house to meet their demand and paid a sum of Rs. 25,000/- to Rajinder (appellant). Even then, the accused were not happy and they did not change their attitude towards Rajwati and raised another demand of scooter and cash amount of Rs. 20,000/-. Rajwati was sent back to her parental house to meet their demands. He (PW-8) accompanied by two persons namely his brother-in-law Daya Ram and Bishamber Dayal had gone to the house of the accused to persuade them to bring back his daughter to their house but they refused to do so on which Rajwati started remaining sad and depressed. 17. Harish Ahuja, PW-7 is the neighbourer of Ram Het. He attended Rajwati on 13.5.1995 at 9.30 A.M. when she had set herself on fire and it is also proved that when he, Tulsi and Raj Kumari wife of Tulsi reached there they heard Rajwati uttering words that she was fed up with her husband and others and she wanted to finish her life as they were pressuring her for the demand of dowry. 18. Even the dying declaration, Exhibit PD, was made by Rajwati on 17.5.1993 which has been proved by Dr. Shashi Bala, PW-3. Even as per dying declaration, Rajwati has specifically deposed that one month after the marriage, she was harassed/tortured by her in-laws for dowry demand. Her husband Rajinder and her mother-in-law Smt. Natho started taunting and beating her. They demanded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for the construction of house which she got paid from her father to the accused. About 5 or 6 months prior to the occurrence, her mother-in-law and her husband started demanding a scooter and Rs. 20,000/- in cash. Being harassed, she came back to the house of her father in Faridabad. They demanded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for the construction of house which she got paid from her father to the accused. About 5 or 6 months prior to the occurrence, her mother-in-law and her husband started demanding a scooter and Rs. 20,000/- in cash. Being harassed, she came back to the house of her father in Faridabad. It is further stated in dying declaration Exhibit PD that her husband and mother-in-law had told her to come back to their house only after scooter and cash amount of Rs. 20,000/- were paid to them by her father and told her specifically not to return to their house if the demands were not met. It is further stated in the dying declaration that her father was not possessed of adequate money for meeting the demand of her in-laws and, therefore, there was no place for her in the house of her in-laws or in the house of her father. For that reason, finding herself alone in her parental house on 13.5.1993, she set herself on fire as she was harassed by her in-laws. 19. Evidence led by the prosecution is, therefore, conclusive that Rajwati was harassed, maltreated, tortured and treated with cruelty by her husband Rajinder and her mother-in-law Smt. Natho, appellants in connection with dowry demand and she was staying in her parental house only because she was told by the appellants not to return to their house if the demands were not met. 20. The submission of learned counsel for the appellants was that the alleged occurrence had taken place on 13.5.1993 but the matter was reported to the police on 15.5.1993. Hence, there is extreme delay in reporting the matter to the police and it was prayed that the accused be acquitted. 21. This submission has been considered by me. It has come in the evidence that Ram Het PW-8 was out of station at the time of occurrence as he had gone to Delhi. He came to know about the occurrence after his return from Delhi and by that time Rajwati was also shifted to B.K. Hospital, Faridabad. Immediately, thereafter the complainant reached the hospital and started attending to his daughter Rajwati who had suffered burn injuries, Rajwati was declared unfit on 13.5.1993 by the doctor to make the statement (Exhibit PC). She also remained unfit to make statement even on 14.5.1993 and also on 15.5.1993. Immediately, thereafter the complainant reached the hospital and started attending to his daughter Rajwati who had suffered burn injuries, Rajwati was declared unfit on 13.5.1993 by the doctor to make the statement (Exhibit PC). She also remained unfit to make statement even on 14.5.1993 and also on 15.5.1993. Therefore, Ram Het made statement to the police and got the case registered on 15.5.1993. Ram Het remained busy in attending to his daughter Rajwati to save her life. Delay in reporting the matter to the police has been explained. Therefore, delay in reporting the matter to the police is not fatal in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 22. The next submission of learned counsel for the appellants was that dying declaration was neither recorded by the Magistrate nor it has been proved by the Assistant Sub Inspector of the police who had recorded. Hence, it was prayed that the dying declaration cannot be taken to be a valid piece of evidence against the appellants. 23. This submission has no merits at all. Dying declaration has been proved by Dr. Shashi Bala, PW-3 who was present at the time when the statement of Rajwati was recorded by ASI Sat Narain. Dr. Shashi Bala, PW-3 in whose presence the statement of Rajwati was recorded had made specific endorsement on the statement of Rajwati Exhibit PD that Rajwati remained fit when she made the statement. A note is also given that her right hand was burnt. Therefore, thumb impression of left hand of Rajwati was obtained on her statement. The sanctity of statement Exhibit PD is not diluted merely because it was not written in the presence of the Magistrate or merely because ASI Sat Narain who had recorded the statement was not examined as a witness. 24. It was then submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that Rajwati died in her parental house where she was living for the last four or five months prior to the occurrence and, therefore, the question of cruelty towards her "soon before her death" does not arise. It was prayed that these constituents of the offence punishable under Section 304-Indian Penal Code are not proved. 25. This submission has been considered by me. Rajwati was living in the house of her parents only when she was maltreated and tortured by the accused because of dowry demand. It was prayed that these constituents of the offence punishable under Section 304-Indian Penal Code are not proved. 25. This submission has been considered by me. Rajwati was living in the house of her parents only when she was maltreated and tortured by the accused because of dowry demand. Rajwati has made it clear in her dying declaration dated 17.5.1993 Exhibit PD that she could not go back to the house of her in- laws as their demand could not be met by her father because of poverty and she had no place to live in the house of her father as she did not want to become a burden on him. This led her to commit suicide by setting herself on fire. This circumstance also fulfils the requisite requirement of harassment "soon before her death". Since she was not allowed to enter the house of her in-laws unless their demands were met, therefore, the same amounted to cruelty soon before the occurrence. In this context, reference can be made to the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court reported as Kans Raj v. State of Punjab and others, 2000 Criminal Law Journal page 2993 in which it was observed by the Honble Supreme Court as under :- "Soon before" is a relative term which is required to be considered under specific circumstances of each case and no straight-jacket formula can be laid down by fixing any time-limit. This expression is pregnant with the idea of proximity test. The term "soon before" is not synonymous with the term "soon immediately before" and is opposite of the expression "soon after" as used and understood in Section 114, Illustration (a) of the Evidence Act. These words would imply that the interval should not be too long between the time of making the statement and the death. It contemplates the reasonable time which, as earlier noticed, has to be understood and determined under the peculiar circumstances of each case. In relation to dowry deaths, the circumstances showing the existence of cruelty or harassment to the deceased was not restricted to a particular instance but normally refer to a course of conduct. Such conduct may be spread over a period of time. In relation to dowry deaths, the circumstances showing the existence of cruelty or harassment to the deceased was not restricted to a particular instance but normally refer to a course of conduct. Such conduct may be spread over a period of time. If the cruelty or harassment or demand for dowry is shown to have persisted it shall be deemed to be soon before death if any other intervening circumstance showing the non-existence of such treatment is not brought on record, before the alleged such treatment and the date of death." 26. In view of the law discussed above and the facts explained, harassment/maltreatment/torture of Rajwati soon before the occurrence leading to her death is clearly proved. 27. The next submission of learned counsel for the appellants was that Rajwati has committed suicide because of depression which is not related to the alleged dowry demand or the alleged harassment by the appellants. This submission has no legs to stand. Ram Het, PW-8 has clearly explained that husband and others had refused to take back Rajwati in their house unless their demand was met and for that reason, Rajwati had become depressed. Even Rajwati has said so in her dying declaration. It clearly means that depression, if any, caused to Rajwati was the result of cruelty towards her for dowry demand made by the appellants. 28. The prosecution has also succeeded to prove that Smt. Natho, appellant, mother-in-law of Rajwati was also living with her son Rajinder appellant and she is specifically named in the dying declaration of Rajwati as responsible for harassing and maltreating her. Therefore, both of them namely husband and mother-in-law of Rajwati are equally responsible for constraining Rajwati to commit suicide. 29. The trial Court has given cogent reasons for recording the conviction of the appellants with which I fully agree. I see no plausible reason to differ with the reasonings given by the learned trial Court. The conviction of the appellants is based on reliable, trust-worthy and unimpeachable evidence brought on the record. Therefore, there is no merit in the present appeal and the same is dismissed. 30. The appellants who are on bail be re-arrested to undergo the remaining part of their sentence. Necessary steps be taken. Appeal dismissed.