JUDGMENT 1. The appellant, Niranjan Mandal, was arrayed as A1 along with Asho @ Ashutosh Manda and Dropadi Mandal, who were arrayed as A2 and A3 respectively. They Page 905 were tried under Section 304B and 201 I.P.C. The Trial Judge, while acquitting Asho @ Ashutosh Manda and Dropadi Mandal, found the appellant alone guilty under Section 304B and 201 I.P.C and on being found guilty, the appellant Niranjan Mandal was sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 304B I.P.C and was also sentenced to imprisonment for three years under Section 201 I.P.C with a further direction that both the sentences will run concurrently. The present appeal is against the said conviction and sentence. 2. The facts are: Gita Devi was given in marriage to the appellant in the year 1990. Before her marriage, she was living with her father P.W.6 Dhaneshwar Mandal and her mother P.W.10 Kamleshwari Devi. After the marriage, she went to the house of her husband (appellant) in the village - Chhoti Kalyani. She was there for some time and returned to her parental home. In the month of Baisakh in the year 1993, there was Gouna as it was the custom in her community. Thereafter, she returned to her husbands home and was residing with her husband. After she came to her husbands home, the appellant started demanding dowry. He was asking a T.V., a cow, a she-goat and some jewellery. He used to beat her. The deceased Gita Devi complained to her father Dhaneshwar Mandal and also informed P.W.4 Moti Lal Mandal and P.W.9 Sidheshwar Mandal as well as her cousin P.W.1 Shyam Mandal. A Panchayati was convened and at the Panchayati, P.W.2 Gauri Mandal, P.W.3 Gaya Ram Singh and P.W.4 Moti Lal Mandal were present along with other villagers. On hearing the complaint of the deceased and her father P.W.6, the Panchayat, thus, questioned the appellant and the appellant gave an undertaking that he will behave properly in future. He also undertook not to beat his wife for not giving the she-goat, cow, T.V and jewellery. On the undertaking given, the Panchayat asked the parties to live in peace. The deceased was taken by her father P.W.6 to his house for a month, probably, with a view to allow the parties to cool their temper. After spending a month in her fathers house, the deceased returned to her matrimonial home. On the undertaking given, the Panchayat asked the parties to live in peace. The deceased was taken by her father P.W.6 to his house for a month, probably, with a view to allow the parties to cool their temper. After spending a month in her fathers house, the deceased returned to her matrimonial home. This was just prior to 24.1.1994. On 24.1.1994 P.W.6 Dhaneshwar Mandal was informed by a school teacher that his daughter is found dead in her matrimonial home. P.W.6 rushed to the house of his daughter and found her body hanging from the roof. The appellant was not seen in the home. He raised hue and cry and on receipt of the information, the Police Officer, P.W.13, reached the scene of occurrence. The body was brought down and the fardbeyan, Ext.5, was given by P.W.6, on the basis of which a crime was registered and investigation was taken up. Inquest over the dead body was conducted and the inquest report is Ext.7. After the inquest, the body was sent to the hospital for autopsy. 3. Dr. Kalanand Choudhary, who was examined as P.W.12, conducted autopsy and he found one ligature mark on the neck of the victim. The Doctor also noticed the tongue of the deceased bitten between upper and lower jaws of the teeth. He also found saliva dribbling out of mouth. He issued Ext.3, the post mortem certificate, with his opinion that death is account of asphyxia as a result of hanging. 4. After the completion of investigation, final report was filed against the appellant and when he was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C, he stated that he was not in the village but he was at the college. No witness was examined on his side. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the prosecution has failed to establish that the deceased died on account of cruelty meted out to her by Page 906 the appellant and therefore, no offence under Section 304B I.P.C is made out. We have heard Mr. R. Mukhopadhaya, learned Counsel appearing for the State. 6. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the prosecution has failed to establish that the deceased died on account of cruelty meted out to her by Page 906 the appellant and therefore, no offence under Section 304B I.P.C is made out. We have heard Mr. R. Mukhopadhaya, learned Counsel appearing for the State. 6. On the medical evidence as could be seen from the evidence of Doctor P.W.12, and the post mortem certificate, Ext.3, issued by him, it can be safely held that the deceased died on account of hanging and the only question that is to be decided by us is whether death of Gita Devi was "otherwise than under normal circumstances". 7. It is not in dispute that the deceased Gita Devi died within seven years of her marriage with the appellant. According to the prosecution, as could be seen from the evidence of P.W.6, father of the deceased, P.W.10 mother of the deceased as well as P.W.1 cousin of the deceased, the appellant married the deceased in the year 1990. The evidence further shows that after her marriage, she was living in the house of her husband and that the deceased informed her parents as well as the close relatives that the appellant is demanding T.V., a cow, she-goat and jewellery. The evidence of the witnesses, namely, P.Ws.1, 3, 4 and 6 shows that she wept before them and told them that she is being assaulted by her husband for not bringing the above materials sought by him. It is no doubt true that no independent witness gave evidence to show that the deceased made complaints to her father and the relatives about the ill-treatment meted out to her; but it is not a surprise as no independent witness will be able to speak about these aspects as normally such incidents take place within the four walls of a room and it will be in the exclusive knowledge of the victim and her husband. The victim will not normally inform the third parties about the strained relationship between her and her husband. On going through the evidence of the witnesses, we find no artificiality attached to it. In fact, their evidence gets support from the evidence of P.Ws.2, 3 and 4. The victim will not normally inform the third parties about the strained relationship between her and her husband. On going through the evidence of the witnesses, we find no artificiality attached to it. In fact, their evidence gets support from the evidence of P.Ws.2, 3 and 4. P.Ws.2, 3 and 4 and other witnesses have stated in their evidence that there was a Panchayati a month prior to the date of occurrence and at the Panchayati, a complaint was made about the alleged ill-treatment and the cruelty meted out to the deceased by the appellant and that the appellant promised to make amends in future. According to the prosecution, as could be seen from the evidence of the witnesses, the deceased went to her parents house immediately after the Panchayati. The deceased probably would have been sent to the house of her father to allow time for the tempers to cool down between the parties. The evidence further shows that the deceased, after staying a month in the house of her parents, returned to her matrimonial house and soon thereafter P.W.6 received information from a school teacher that his daughter is found dead in the village; P.W.6 went to his daughters house and thereafter gave a complaint, Ext.5, in which he had given graphic details as to what transpired prior to his daughters death. On going through the evidence, we are satisfied that the appellant was demanding a cow, she-goat, T.V and jewellery and was ill-treating his wife, Gita Devi, for not bringing the above items. We are also satisfied that a Panchayati was convened a month prior to the date of occurrence on account of the behaviour of the appellant towards his wife and that within a month of convening the Panchayati, the deceased died in her matrimonial home. In the above circumstances, it is for the appellant to explain as to what prompted the deceased to commit suicide since there is no evidence that she was murdered and hanged. The appellant had no explanation to offer; but had come out with the only answer, when he was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C, that he was at the college. He did not produce any material to show that he was studying in a college and was not present in the village on the Page 907 date of occurrence. The appellant had no explanation to offer; but had come out with the only answer, when he was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C, that he was at the college. He did not produce any material to show that he was studying in a college and was not present in the village on the Page 907 date of occurrence. Absence of any explanation by the appellant as to what prompted the deceased to commit suicide is to be put against the appellant. In the background of the evidence of the witnesses and the Panchayati, we are satisfied that the death of Gita Devi occurred "otherwise than under normal circumstances" as contemplated under Section 304B I.P.C and the death was within seven years of her marriage with the appellant. 8. In Kamesh Panjiyar v. State of Bihar , the Supreme Court held as follows: A conjoint reading of Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and Section 304-B I.P.C shows that there must be material to show that "soon before her death", the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment "for or in connection with the demand of dowry". Prosecution has to rule out the possibility of a natural or accidental death so as to bring it within the purview of "death occurring otherwise than in normal circumstances". The expression "soon before her death" is very relevant where Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and Section 304-B I.P.C are pressed into service. Prosecution is obliged to show that soon before the occurrence there was cruelty or harassment and only in that case presumption operates. Evidence in that regard has to be led by prosecution. "Soon before" is a relative term and it would depend upon the circumstances of each case and no straitjacket 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 as indicated by the said expression both for the proof of an offence of dowry death as well as for raising a presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act. A reference to the expression "soon before" used in Section 114 Illustration (a) of the Evidence Act is relevant. A reference to the expression "soon before" used in Section 114 Illustration (a) of the Evidence Act is relevant. The determination of the period which can come within the term "soon before" under Section 114 Illustration (a) is left to be determined by the courts, depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Suffice, however, to indicate that the expression "soon before" would normally imply that the interval should not be much between the cruelty or harassment concerned 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 death concerned. If the 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. 9. Keeping the above principle in mind, when we look at the evidence, it could be seen that the occurrence took place within one month of the Panchayati, which was convened at the instance of P.W.6 for making a complaint against the appellant. The appellant at the Panchayati gave an undertaking that he will treat his wife in a proper manner and that the deceased, after staying in her parents house, returned to her matrimonial home only to die immediately thereafter. The prosecution on the above circumstances not only established that the deceased died otherwise than under normal circumstances, but also the fact that the said death is on account of cruelty and harassment meted out to her by her husband, "appellant". We are, therefore, satisfied that the prosecution has established the offence under Section 304B I.P.C against the appellant. 10. We do not find any material for the appellant to be convicted under Section 201 I.P.C. There is no evidence that the appellant murdered the deceased. It is the case of the prosecution as it could be seen from the medical evidence that the deceased committed suicide on account of cruelty and harassment meted out to her by her husband. Therefore, we acquit the appellant for the offence under Section 201 I.P.C. 11. We will now consider the nature of sentence to be imposed upon the appellant. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the sentence of imprisonment for life imposed upon the appellant is too harsh and he has suffered enough. 12. Therefore, we acquit the appellant for the offence under Section 201 I.P.C. 11. We will now consider the nature of sentence to be imposed upon the appellant. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the sentence of imprisonment for life imposed upon the appellant is too harsh and he has suffered enough. 12. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case, we modify the conviction and sentence of imprisonment for life imposed upon the appellant to one of ten years. In the result, the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 201 I.P.C are set aside. The conviction of the appellant under Section 304B I.P.C is confirmed and the sentence of imprisonment for life is modified and the appellant is directed to suffer imprisonment for a period of ten years. If the appellant had undergone the, sentence of ten years, the same will be given set off. With the aforesaid modification in the conviction and sentence, this appeal is dismissed.