Judgment S.N.Aggarwal, J. 1. Baljinder Kaur (now deceased) was the daughter of Chani. She was married to Balbir Singh appellant about three years prior to the occurrence. One son was born from this wedlock who was about two years old at that time. Said Baljinder Kaur committed suicide by hanging by tying one end of her headgear (Chuni) with the girder of the roof and the other end of the headgear with her neck. 2. Originally, the matter was reported to the police by Balbir Singh on 1.10.2000 at about 3.45 PM. However, Chani complainant (father of the deceased) appeared on the scene and he reported the matter to the police on 2.10.2000 at about 6.15 PM. His version was that enough dowry was given to his daughter Baljinder Kaur alias Nikki at the time of her marriage with Balbir Singh. The in-laws of Baljinder Kaur were not satisfied with it and they were harassing her. They also started quarreling with her, beating her and demanding more dowry. She was even pressed to go back to her parental house and bring scooter for them from her parents. The dowry demand of her in-laws increased and Balbir Singh even demanded money from them for going abroad. The money was paid. However, neither Balbir Singh went abroad nor he returned the money. Rather, he was threatening the complainant that if the money was demanded back by them or if the scooter was not provided to him, then he would throw out his daughter (Baljinder Kaur) from his house or he would kill her. 3. Chani also reported that he had received information on 30.9.2000 at about 9 P.M. that his daughter had suffered heart attack. They reached the house of the accused on 1.10.2000 at about 6 A.M. and he found his daughter lying dead. When enquiries were made by him from Balbir Singh about the death of Baljinder Kaur, he was told that Baljinder Kaur had suffered an injury by striking with the box (Petti). When he asked Balbir Singh to disclose true facts, then he was told that Baljinder Kaur has committed suicide by hanging. Chani complainant was not satisfied and he believed that his daughter Baljinder Kaur has been murdered by her husband Balbir Singh, mother-in-law Jagir Kaur, her Jethani Jaswinder Kaur, her sister-in-law Bholi and her father-in-law Chuhar Singh with common intention. When he asked Balbir Singh to disclose true facts, then he was told that Baljinder Kaur has committed suicide by hanging. Chani complainant was not satisfied and he believed that his daughter Baljinder Kaur has been murdered by her husband Balbir Singh, mother-in-law Jagir Kaur, her Jethani Jaswinder Kaur, her sister-in-law Bholi and her father-in-law Chuhar Singh with common intention. Even ligature mark was present on the neck of Baljinder Kaur who was murdered for dowry demand. Hence, he prayed that action be taken against the murderers. 4. The dead body of Baljinder Kaur was got subjected to post-mortem examination. The investigation was completed and the challan was presented against all the five persons named in the statement of Chani. 5. Charge was framed against them to which the appellant and co-accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 6. In support of its case, the prosecution examined Dr. Swaran Singh, as PW-1. This witness had conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of Baljinder Kaur. He opined that the cause of death, in this case, was asphyxia due to hanging. Milkhi Ram, Constable appeared as PW-2. Sadhu Ram, uncle of the deceased appeared as PW-3. Surinder appeared as PW-4 while Chani, complainant (father of Baljinder Kaur deceased) appeared as PW-5. Gopal Dass was examined as PW-6 while ASI Dev Raj appeared as PW-7. SI Sucha Singh who had investigated the case appeared as PW-8. The prosecution closed its evidence. 7. Balbir Singh appellant took the plea in his statement that he was innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Nikki (Baljinder Kaur) died due to mental problem as she was ill and on that day, she locked the door of the room from inside on the pretext that she was going to sleep but in the evening when he came back from his work, he knocked the door but no voice was heard from inside. Then he broke the door open and saw that his wife was hanging with the celling with Dupatta (headgear) and died due to that reason. 8. In defence, the appellant had examined Paramjit Singh Bhatia, Inspector Food & Supplies as DW-1, Balbir Singh Consumer Clerk, PSEB as DW-2 while Sarup Chand Sarpanch of his village as DW-3. 9. The defence evidence was closed. 10. 8. In defence, the appellant had examined Paramjit Singh Bhatia, Inspector Food & Supplies as DW-1, Balbir Singh Consumer Clerk, PSEB as DW-2 while Sarup Chand Sarpanch of his village as DW-3. 9. The defence evidence was closed. 10. On the basis of this evidence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar convicted the appellant alone for an offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC while his co-accused were acquitted vide judgment dated 21.8.2002. The appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years. He also fined to an amount of Rs. 2,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. Hence this appeal. 11. The submission of learned counsel for the appellant was that no case is made out against the appellant, much-less the offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC. It was submitted that Sadhu Ram, PW-3 and Surinder PW-4 have not supported the prosecution case while the statements of remaining witnesses are highly inadequate to base conviction. Hence, the acquittal of the appellant was prayed. 12. The record of this case has been perused and the submissions have been considered. 13-14 It has been settled by a series of judgments rendered by the Honble Supreme Court as also by this Court that in order to attract the provisions of Section 304-B IPC, the following constituents must be made out :- "(i) The death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under a normal circumstances. (ii) Such a death should have occurred within seven years of her marriage. (iii) She must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband. (iv) Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with demanded of dowry. (v) Such cruelty or harrasment is shown to have been meted out to the woman soon before her death. If the prosecution is able to prove these circumstances then the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act will operate. It is a rebuttable presumption and the onns to rebut shifts on the accused. 15. Now let us examine the evidence to analyse if these constituents are proved by the prosecution. 16. So far as the cause of death is concerned, it is not in dispute. Dr. It is a rebuttable presumption and the onns to rebut shifts on the accused. 15. Now let us examine the evidence to analyse if these constituents are proved by the prosecution. 16. So far as the cause of death is concerned, it is not in dispute. Dr. Swaran Singh, PW-1 Senior Medical Officer who was posted in Civil Hospital Jalandhar on 2.10.2000 had conducted post-mortem examination and he has opined that the cause of death, in this case, was asphyxia due to hanging. The injuries were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in the natural course of time. The case of the appellant is also that she has died by hanging. Therefore, it is conclusively proved that Baljinder Kaur has died by hanging. It means, therefore, that Baljinder Kaur has died otherwise than under normal circumstances. 17. The next important circumstance which needs to be established is whether the death of Baljinder Kaur had taken in unnatural circumstances within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage. Sadhu Ram, PW-3 has deposed that Baljinder Kaur was married to Balbir Singh about three or four years prior to the occurrence. Surinder, PW-4 has also deposed that the marriage of Baljinder Kaur with Balbir Singh had taken place about four or four and a half years back. Chani, PW-5 (father of Baljinder Kaur, deceased) has deposed that the marriage of his daughter with Balbir Singh had taken place about four years back. Therefore, there is positive evidence that the marriage of Baljinder Kaur (now deceased) with Balbir Singh (now appellant) had taken place within a period of seven years from the date of occurrence. Even Sarup Chand, DW-3 who appeared as a witness on behalf of the appellant has also deposed that the marriage of Baljinder Kaur had taken place with the appellant about four years back. Therefore, it is conclusively proved that the death of Baljinder Kaur has taken place in circumstances other than under normal circumstances within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage with the appellant. 18. Now, the question arises whether she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the appellant soon before her death in connection with the demand of dowry. 19. Chani, PW-5, of the father of the deceased has deposed that the accused were making the demands of scooter from Nikki (Baljinder Kaur). 18. Now, the question arises whether she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the appellant soon before her death in connection with the demand of dowry. 19. Chani, PW-5, of the father of the deceased has deposed that the accused were making the demands of scooter from Nikki (Baljinder Kaur). He could not afford the scooter and as such he paid a sum of Rs. 8,000/- to the accused. Even thereafter the accused had been mal-treating his daughter on the ground of demand of dowry. Gopal Dass, PW-6 is the brother of the deceased. He has also deposed that after marriage, all the accused had been mal-treating Baljinder Kaur on the ground of dowry demand. They had raised the demand of a scooter. They could not afford the scooter and gave a sum of Rs. 8,000/- to the accused and even thereafter the accused had been mal-treating and beating her on the ground of demand of more dowry. 20. Although, Sadhu Ram PW-3 has deposed that Baljinder Kaur was kept well by her in-laws after the marriage and Surinder, PW-4 has deposed that Baljinder Kaur was not harassed or mal-treated by her in-laws, but Chani, PW-5 and Gopal Dass, PW-6 have proved that Baljinder Kaur was tortured, mal-treated and harrased by her husband (appellant) and his relatives. If she had been kept well as alleged by the accused, then there was no cause for Baljinder Kaur to end her life by hanging particularly when she had a son of about two years of age at the time of occurrence. A mother is fully attached to her son. She could bear pains for herself to save her son even from a fraction of pain. A mother also knows that if she leaves the world, her son would not be looked after as well as thereafter, and, therefore, she would survive if not for herself at least for her son. We can imagine the extreme of pain caused to her by the cruelty committed by the appellant towards her that she had to forego even the care of her child but in order to get rid of her mal-treatment, she became mentally prepared to end her life. If she had been kept with all comforts, then this extreme step could not have been taken by her. 21. If she had been kept with all comforts, then this extreme step could not have been taken by her. 21. The version of the appellants that she was suffering from a mental problem which led her to commit suicide is not at all probable. Sarup Chand, DW-3 is just a Sarpanch of the village. Therefore, he is deposing merely because the appellant happens to be his co-villager. The appellant has not placed any medical evidence on the file to show if Baljinder Kaur had any mental problem or if she was getting medical treatment from any hospital. It is not even stated by him in his statement if he was taking her to a Doctor or to a hospital for her treatment. No prescription slip or medical bill has been proved on the file. Therefore, the version of the appellant that she committed suicide as she was suffering from a mental problem is a fiction created by the appellant to save his skin. The conduct of Baljinder Kaur in committing suicide, therefore, corroborates the statements of her father Chani, PW-5 and of her brother Gopal Dass, PW-6 that she was harassed, tortured and treated with cruelty by her husband. 22. It is also proved that the harassment and mal-treatment was in connection with the dowry demand. Both Chani PW-5 Gopal Dass, PW-6 have deposed that after the marriage, the accused had demanded scooter and that they had paid a sum Rs. 8,000/- to the accused. 23. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant was that Sadhu Ram, PW-3 and Surinder, PW-4 have not supported the prosecution case regarding dowry demand. However, their statements carry no value. The dowry could be demanded either from the parents or from the brother of a wife. Therefore, they are the persons who can depose about it. The things are kept close to their family alone. It is only the wearer who knows where the shoe pinches. Therefore, only the brother, mother and the father can know about the dowry demand and their statements are relevant and reliable and not the statements of witnesses who are beyond the closest degree. Therefore, the statements of Sadhu Ram, PW-3 and Surinder, PW-4 do not carry any weight in the presence of the statements of the father of the deceased (Chani, PW-5) and of the brother of the deceased (Gopal Dass, PW-6). Therefore, the statements of Sadhu Ram, PW-3 and Surinder, PW-4 do not carry any weight in the presence of the statements of the father of the deceased (Chani, PW-5) and of the brother of the deceased (Gopal Dass, PW-6). Therefore, the statements of Sadhu Ram, PW-3 and of Surinder PW-4 do not frustrate the prosecution case. 24. Another submission of the learned counsel for the appellant was that both Chani PW-5 and Gopal Dass PW-6 have stated before the police on 1.10.2000 that the accused were innocent and Baljinder Kaur had committed suicide because of her folly or because of her mental illness. It was put to them in their cross-examination but both of them denied it having made such statements to the police. Chani, PW-5 has rather explained that his signatures were obtained by the police on blank papers. Those alleged statements do no carry any evidentiary value when both of them have made sworn statements in the Court. 25. It was also submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that Chani, PW-5 has appeared before the Session Court on 7.11.2000 and had absolved the accused of any such allegation. Chani PW-5 has explained that he was drugged and was made to make statement at that time. It is not explained by the learned defence counsel as to what was the stage of making the statement by Chani, PW-5 on 7.11.2000 in the Court of Sessions. He has specifically deposed now that his daughter Baljinder Kaur was tortured because of dowry demand. Moreover, it is not his statement alone on which the prosecution relies. He is further corroborated by the statement of Gopal Dass, PW-6. Therefore, I find no infirmity in the prosecution evidence that the deceased was harassed and mal-treated for and in connection with dowry demand. 26. Now the question to be answered is whether the deceased was tortured or harrased in connection with the dowry demand soon before her death. The words `soon before are relative and are not to be read in isolation. The Honble Supreme Court was pleased to hold in the judgment reported as Kamlesh Panjiyar @ Kamlesh Panjiyar v. State of Bihar, 2005(1) RCR(Crl.) 861 : 2005(1) Apex Crl. The words `soon before are relative and are not to be read in isolation. The Honble Supreme Court was pleased to hold in the judgment reported as Kamlesh Panjiyar @ Kamlesh Panjiyar v. State of Bihar, 2005(1) RCR(Crl.) 861 : 2005(1) Apex Crl. 390 (SC) : 2005 AIR SCW 770, as under :- "A conjoint reading of Section 113B of the Evidence Act and Section 304-B, IPC shows that there must be material to show that soon before her death, the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment. Prosecution has to rule out the possibility of a natural or accidental death so as to bring it within the purview of the `death occurring otherwise than in normal circumstances. The expression `soon before is very relevant where Section 113B of the Evidence Act and Section 304B, IPC are pressed into service. Prosecution is obliges to show that soon before the occurrence there was cruelty or harassment and in that case presumption operates. Evidence in that regard has to be led by the prosecution. `Soon before is a relative term and it would depend upon circumstances of each case and no strait-jacket formula can be laid down as to what would constitute a period of soon before the occurrence. It would be hazardous to indicate any fixed period, and that brings in the importance of a proximity test both for the proof of an offence of dowry death as well as for raising a presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act. The expression `soon before her death used in the substantive Section 304B, and Section 113B of the Evidence Act is present pregnant ? With the idea of proximity test. No define period has been indicated and the expression soon before is not defined. A reference to expression soon before used in Section 114, illustration (a) of the Evidence Act is relevant. It lays down that a Court may presume that a man who is in the possession of goods soon after the theft, is either the thief has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can account for his possession. The determination of the period which can come within the term `soon before is left to be determined by the Courts, depending upon facts and circumstances of each case. The determination of the period which can come within the term `soon before is left to be determined by the Courts, depending upon facts and circumstances of each case. Suffice, however, to that the expression soon before would normally imply that the interval should not be much between the concerned cruelty or harassment and the death in question. There must be existence of a proximate and live-link between the effects of cruelty based on dowry demand and the concerned death. If alleged incident of cruelty is remote in time and has become stale enough not to disturb mental equilibrium of the woman concerned, it would be of no consequence". 27. In the present case, Baljinder Kaur died within three or four years of her marriage. Her son was only two years old. Rs. 8,000/- were paid by her parents to the appellant as dowry demand when she was pressurised to bring scooter from her parents. Both Chani, PW-5 and Gopal Dass, PW-6 have deposed that she was harrased or mal-treated by the accused even thereafter. These statements are confirmed by the conduct of the deceased who preferred to end her life instead of compelling her parents to dole out more amount to the accused. If the demand and consequential mal-treatment had stopped, she would not have taken the extreme. 28. It is also settled that if the death of a woman takes place in unnatural circumstances within seven years of her marriage, it may be suicidal or homicidal, it would by dowry death. Reference may be made to the judgments of the Honble Supreme Court reported as K. Prena S. Rao v. Yadla Srinivas Rao, 2002(4) RCR(Crl.) 697 (SC) : (2003)1 SCC 217 and Satvir Singh v. State of Punjab, (2001)(4) RCR(Crl.) 355 (SC) : (2001)8 SCC 633. Therefore, even when Baljinder Kaur has committed suicide, it would amount to dowry death in the circumstances proved in this case. For the reasons discussed above, the conviction of the appellant under Section 304-B I.P.C. is upheld. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, his sentence is reduced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years. He is also burdened with the fine amount of Rs. 2,000/- in default of which he will further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. The appeal is disposed in the above terms.