Judgment Mahesh Grover, J. 1. On 7.4.1996, deceased Amarjit Kaur suffered burn injuries in her matrimonial home within three years of her marriage. She breathed her last on 15.7.1996. The FIR was registered at the behest of her mother Joginder Kaur on 16.7.1996. 2. According to the allegations in the FIR, the deceased was being subjected to cruelty and maltreatment ever since her marriage on account of bringing less dowry. This allegedly led to her being burnt alive at the hands of the appellants and one Manjeet Kaur, sister-in-law of the deceased. 3. The police investigated the matter and prima facie found that the appellants and one Manjeet Kaur (who was subsequently acquitted by the trial Court) were involved in the commission of the offence under Sections 498-A and 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. A challan was accordingly presented against all the accused persons. 4. The trial Court charged all the accused under Section 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and all the accused persons went to trial. 5. The prosecution in order to establish its case against the accused examined as may as 11 witnesses, which included the testimony of PW-1 Dr. Madhu Bala, who conducted the post-mortem upon the deceased. 6. In their statements recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure all the accused persons denied the allegations against them but admitted that the marriage was three years old. It was pleaded that the deceased Amarjit Kaurs clothes had caught fire accidentally from the stove upon which she was working. 7. In support of the defence version as put forward by the accused persons, they tendered certain documents which are Mark `A to Mark `X on record. The statement of deceased Amarjit Kaur recorded by HC Raja Ram on 9.4.1996 was got proved during the cross-examination of PW-3 Surjit Singh, brother of the deceased. 8. The trial Court after appraisal of the evidence before it came to the conclusion that the appellants were guilty of having committed an offence under Section 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced all of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for 6 months each. 2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for 6 months each. Manjit Kaur, one of the accused persons was, however, acquitted by the trial Court. 9. The aforesaid conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants vide judgment dated 20.7.2001 has been assailed by them by way of the present appeal. 10. It was contended by Mr. G.S. Punia, learned counsel for the appellants that the statement of the deceased was recorded on 9.4.1996, barely two days after the occurrence in which the deceased is said to have given out the version that she had suffered burn injuries on account of an accident in the kitchen where she was working. She stated that while working on the stove the oil spilled on her clothes which were of synthetic material and caught fire instantaneously. Her husband, namely Gurvir Singh is said to have made an attempt to extinguish the fire with the help of a blanket and she was rushed to the hospital. 11. With great emphasis on this statement it was contended by the counsel for the appellants that the appellants could not be held guilty of committing any offence. That apart, the deceased died after almost three months of the occurrence on account of septicemia. She had been taken away from the hospital against all advice by the complainant and her family members and ultimately when her condition worsened she was taken to D.M.C., Ludhiana where she breathed her last. It was then contended in the backdrop of the above facts that the complainant remained silent for these three months and close to lodge an FIR on 16.7.1996, after her death. Had there been any substance in the allegations, then the complainant as an aggrieved mother would certainly have protested by reporting the matter to the police earlier. 12. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State contended that no weight could be attached to the statement of the deceased recorded on 9.4.1996 which is on record as Ex. DX for the simple reason that she apparently was in fear of the appellants. He further contended that there is Ex. PG on record which was the application dated 12.7.1996 in which the deceased had stated that she was set on fire by all the appellants. DX for the simple reason that she apparently was in fear of the appellants. He further contended that there is Ex. PG on record which was the application dated 12.7.1996 in which the deceased had stated that she was set on fire by all the appellants. In view of this and coupled with the fact that the death had taken place within three years of the marriage, inviting a strong presumption of law and as such the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court is perfectly in order. 13. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 14. There is no doubt that if an unnatural death takes place within seven years of the marriage, it invites a strong presumption of law under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act against the persons who are arrayed as accused. But if the presumption of law is effectively met by cogent evidence on record, then in that eventuality the benefit necessarily has to go to the accused. A perusal of Ex. DX, which was the statement recorded barely two days after the incident, shows that the deceased had given a forthright account of the incident. Apparently she was not having any malice in her mind against the appellants who were her in-laws. Had she been tormented in her matrimonial home she would certainly have stated in her statement which was her first account given to the police in an anguished state of mind. 15. The testimony of PW-1 Dr. Madhu Bala is also revealing. She found the following injuries on the person of the deceased : "1. An infected wound 5 cm x 4 cm on the ventral medial aspect of right elbow joint. 2. An infected wound 3 cm x 7 cm present on the ventral aspect of right forearm 6 cm away from the elbow joint and there was a scar marking of burn on the ventral surface of lower part of right upper arm. 3. On opening the dressing of both the lower limbs we found infected wounds of burns on the both lower limbs except left foot and half part of the right foot. 4. We found scar marks of burns on both breasts, lower part of chest and upper part of abdomen. 5. 3. On opening the dressing of both the lower limbs we found infected wounds of burns on the both lower limbs except left foot and half part of the right foot. 4. We found scar marks of burns on both breasts, lower part of chest and upper part of abdomen. 5. A scar mark of burn about 5 cm x 4 cm present on the front of the neck in its middle and another scar mark of burn present on lower aspect of thin." 16. When these injuries are examined in conjunction with the statement Ex. DX it leaves little room for doubt that the version given by the deceased explaining the incident as an accident is correct. A person who is hunched over a stubborn stove and is trying to light it would certainly get the oil spilled on her person and the consequent impact of the fire leading to injuries would approximately be the same as has been explained by PW-1 Dr. Madhu Bala in the post-mortem report. 17. Another indicator of the falsity of the allegations of the prosecution is the deafening silence of the complainant for as many as three months. It is not conceivable that an aggrieved mother would remain a silent spectator to the agony of her daughter who was being maltreated in her matrimonial home and even when she was allegedly burnt for such a long period and wait till the time she died to express her festering resentment. 18. The statement Ex. PG alluded to by the learned counsel for the State does not inspire any confidence as a perusal thereof shows that it is a typed version probably given to the police after much deliberations. Besides, it was rightly pointed but the counsel for the appellants that no FIR was registered on the basis of this statement and strangely enough in the FIR which was registered on 16.7.1996 there is not even a mention of this statement. This piece of evidence, therefore, necessarily has to be discarded in favour of the appellants. 19. Another intriguing aspect of the matter is that there is no record available regarding the treatment given to the deceased immediately after she was taken to the hospital except for the testimony of PW-1 Dr. Madhu Bala and the post-mortem report. 20. This piece of evidence, therefore, necessarily has to be discarded in favour of the appellants. 19. Another intriguing aspect of the matter is that there is no record available regarding the treatment given to the deceased immediately after she was taken to the hospital except for the testimony of PW-1 Dr. Madhu Bala and the post-mortem report. 20. Having regard to the aforesaid facts, I accept the appeal and acquit all the appellants of the charges against them.