Judgment M.M.Aggarwal, J. 1. This is an appeal against judgment dated 19.9.1992 of Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, whereby appellants Radha Krishan, Ved Parkash and Chameli Devi were convicted for offence under Section 304-B IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years. 2. Prosecution case against the appellants was that Santosh Devi daughter of Sita Ram complainant was married to Ved Parkash accused/appellant on 31.1.1990. About Rs. 1,25,000/- were spent on that marriage by Sita Ram complainant. After 15 days of her marriage, Santosh Devi came to her parents house and stated that her mother-in-law Chameli Devi, father-in-law Radha Krishan, husband Ved Parkash, Sajjan Kumar and Raj Kumar brothers of the husband and Shakuntla Devi wife of Sajjan Kumar were harassing her on the pretext that she had brought meager dowry. Rs. 50,000/- were demanded. Sita Ram showed his inability to pay. He somehow paid Rs. 20,000/- in July 1990 by withdrawing it from Jangpur branch of Oriental Bank of Commerce, but accused continued demanding Rs. 30,000/- and threatened that, failing which, they will pour kerosene oil on Santosh Devi and will kill her. On 25.9.990, Santosh Devi was admitted to D.M.C. Ludhiana with burn injuries and she died on the same evening. 3. Police had originally registered case under Sections 306/498-A/148/149 IPC but then had challaned the accused for offence under Section 304-B IPC as well. 4. During trial, Sajjan Kumar and Raj Kumar had died. Shakuntla Devi was acquitted, whereas Radha Krishan, Ved Parkash and Chemeli Devi were convicted for offence under Section 304-B IPC and sentenced as aforesaid. 5. From the statement of Sita Ram, father of the deceased who appeared as PW- 3, it was pointed out by counsel for the appellants that Sita Ram has admitted having paid Rs. 20,000/- as loan to Radha Krishan and which amount was to be returned to him after using. It was further pointed out that this witness had admitted that Santosh Devi did not talk to him about any dowry demand and it was told by his son only. Further that Santosh had not met him after marriage and he saw her only in Ludhiana hospital. It was pointed out from the statement of Ramesh Kumar PW-4, son of Sita Ram that Santosh Devi did not talk to him about any demand of dowry and it was told by his father that his father had paid Rs. Further that Santosh had not met him after marriage and he saw her only in Ludhiana hospital. It was pointed out from the statement of Ramesh Kumar PW-4, son of Sita Ram that Santosh Devi did not talk to him about any demand of dowry and it was told by his father that his father had paid Rs. 20,000/- to Radha Krishan as loan. This witness had stated that Santosh Devi had never told to him personally about the harassment and dowry demanded. From the statements of these two witnesses who happen to be father and brother of the deceased, it was argued that there was never any demand of dowry and the amount, if any, had been paid as loan and it was not in connection with dowry. 6. However, Kala Devi, mother of Santosh Devi deceased, appearing as PW-5, had stated that there was demand of Rs. 50,000/- and all the accused were harassing and mal-treating Santosh Devi for bringing inadequate dowry. Then Rs. 20,000/- were paid by withdrawing from the bank but demand of remaining amount of Rs. 30,000/- continued. About 15 days prior to the occurrence, Ved Parkash, Santosh Devi and Chameli Devi had come. Ved Parkash and Chemeli Devi had said that Rs. 30,000/-, as balance amount, be paid otherwise they would throw kerosene on her and set her on fire to which they showed their inability and as a protest Chemeli Devi and Ved Parkash left without taking dinner. Santosh Devi had accompanied them. Then, after 15 days accused had burnt her daughter Santosh Devi. She had stated that she, her son Ramesh Kumar and her husband Sita Ram and others went to DMC Ludhiana, where Santosh Devi was lying deadly burnt. She could only speak feebly. Whatever she spoke was slightly audible. She had told that entire family of her in-laws had harassed her and had told her that either she should herself pour kerosene oil on her and burn herself otherwise they would pour kerosene on her and set her on fire and burn her. PW-8 Vijay Kumar had accompanied Sita Ram etc. to DMC Ludhiana. According to this witness when they went to the emergency room of DMC Ludhiana, Santosh Devi was lying burnt. She was found in full senses. In their presence, Sita Ram inquired from Santosh Devi as to what the matter was. PW-8 Vijay Kumar had accompanied Sita Ram etc. to DMC Ludhiana. According to this witness when they went to the emergency room of DMC Ludhiana, Santosh Devi was lying burnt. She was found in full senses. In their presence, Sita Ram inquired from Santosh Devi as to what the matter was. Then Santosh Devi had told that on that morning she had a dispute and quarrel with her mother-in-law and then the accused told her that a can of kerosene oil was there, and that either she should pour kerosene oil on herself and set herself on fire otherwise they would pour it on her and set her on fire. Then Santosh Devi also said that she lifted the kerosene can and poured it on her and set herself on fire and burnt. However, according to this witness, Santosh Devi had told that the accused were demanding more dowry and had been harassing Santosh Devi for bringing inadequate dowry. 7. According to PW-2 Dr. Ashwani Kumar of DMC Ludhiana, Santosh Devi was brought to DMC Ludhiana in emergency department at about 1.15 PM on 25.8.1990 and at that time Santosh Devi had told that she had poured kerosene oil on herself and put her on fire in the kitchen at about 11 a.m. on 25.8.1990 because she had a fight with her mother-in-law in the morning. This fact was mentioned in the injury report Ex. PA. 8. Counsel for the appellants had argued that no reliance could be placed on the statement of PW-5 Kala Devi, mother of the deceased in view of the statements made by Sita Ram and Ramesh Kumar, father and brother of the deceased, who appeared as PW-3 and PW-4, as far as any demand of dowry or harassment due to that demand was concerned. He further argued that as per the first version given by the deceased herself to the doctor, she had a fight with her mother-in-law and then she poured kerosene oil on herself and put her on fire. It was argued that no reliance could further be placed on the testimony of Kala Devi and Vijay Kumar PW-5 and PW-8 when they say that accused had exhorted her to pour kerosene oil on her and she died. It was argued that no reliance could further be placed on the testimony of Kala Devi and Vijay Kumar PW-5 and PW-8 when they say that accused had exhorted her to pour kerosene oil on her and she died. It was argued that neither Kala Devi PW-5 nor Vijay Kumar PW-8 had specified as to which of the accused was present and had exhorted her to commit suicide. 9. Santosh Devi had died within 7-8 months of her marriage. PW-6 Sukhdarshan Singh, Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce had deposed that Rs. 20,000/- were withdrawn from the account of M/s. Sita Ram Ramesh Kumar on 21.7.990 from the Bank. However, both Sita Ram and Ramesh Kumar had stated that this amount was given as loan to Radha Krishan to be returned by him. As such, it cannot be said that this amount was withdrawn or paid to meet the demand of dowry. Both Sita Ram and Ramesh Kumar also did not say that there was any demand of dowry or Santosh Devi had ever talked to them about the demand of dowry. 10. In view of the statements of Sita Ram and Ramesh Kumar, father and brother of the deceased, much reliance cannot be placed on the statement of Kala Devi as far as demand of dowry and harassment for not metting that demand is concerned. 11. However, fact remains that Santosh Devi had died just within 7-8 months of the marriage. She was conscious after receiving burn injuries and she told he doctor that there was a fight with her mother-in-law in the morning. When father, mother and other relatives of Santosh Devi had gone to DMC hospital Ludhiana with Vijay Kumar PW-8, she stated that entire family of her in-laws had harassed her and also told her that either she should herself pour kerosene oil on her and burn herself otherwise they would pour kerosene oil on her and set her on fire and burn her. Then she had lifted the can of kerosene oil and poured it on herself and set her on fire. It will mean that accused had abetted commission of suicide by Santosh Devi. Unless there had been some harassment from the accused, a lady aged about 21 years who just got married 7-8 months back will not died of her own. Then she had lifted the can of kerosene oil and poured it on herself and set her on fire. It will mean that accused had abetted commission of suicide by Santosh Devi. Unless there had been some harassment from the accused, a lady aged about 21 years who just got married 7-8 months back will not died of her own. There may be no need for Santosh Devi to narrate all the facts before the doctor but she had said that she had a fight with her mother-in-law in the morning, whereas she told her mother and other relatives that all the family members of the accused had exhorted her to pour kerosene oil on herself and set her on fire otherwise, they will pour it on her and burn her. This has been deposed by Kala Devi PW-5 and Vijay Kumar PW-8. No questions were asked from Kala Devi as to whether some one, out of the accused, were specifically named or not. Appellants/accused happen to be mother-in-law, husband and father-in-law i.e. the closest family members. They shall be liable for abetment of suicide by Santosh Devi. 12. From the above discussion, I hold that case for offence under Section 306 IPC for abetting commission of suicide by Santosh Devi is proved as against the appellants. This appeal is partly accepted. Accused/appellants shall stand acquitted of the charge under Section 304-B IPC whereas they are convicted for offence under Section 306 IPC. 13. Counsel for the appellants had pointed out that Radha Krishan was 62 yeas of age, Chameli Devi 60 years of age and Ved Parkash 27 years of age in the year 1992 when their statements under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded and now Radha Krishan must be more than 75 years, Chameli Devi 73 years and Ved Parkash 40 years of age and lenient view be taken. Judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Mohd. Hoshan A.P. and another v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2002(4) RCR(Criminal) 155 : 2002 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 1765, has been relied, where mother-in-law who was 60 years had been sentenced to already undergone (about two mothers) for offence under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC. 14. Judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Mohd. Hoshan A.P. and another v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2002(4) RCR(Criminal) 155 : 2002 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 1765, has been relied, where mother-in-law who was 60 years had been sentenced to already undergone (about two mothers) for offence under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC. 14. In the present case, as per trial Court record, Radha Krishan and Chameli Devi appellants had been in custody at least up to 18.11.1991 i.e. about 15 months during trial and about one month after their conviction. It means that they have already undergone about 16 months of imprisonment. They are now aged about 75 years. Their sentence is reduced to already undergone. 15. As far as Ved Parkash appellant is concerned, he is sentenced to RI for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment thereof, to further undergo RI for three months. With above modification, this appeal stands disposed of.