JUDGMENT S.D. Anand, J.:-Appellant Ram Chander is husband of Sneh Lata deceased. Their marriage was solemnized in the year 1993. Sneh Lata is sister of PW1 Rajbir and niece of PW2 Hazari. The appellant (alongwith his parents) was tried, for offences under Sections 302/34 and 201 IPC. His parents earned a verdict of acquittal at the hands of the learned Trial Court. However, the appellant was convicted. 2. The appellant was not satisfied with the adequacy of the dowry brought by Sneh Lata. He had a grievance that inadequate amount had been provided at the time of marriage for the purchase of T.V., Cooler and other household articles. In the course of her visits, 5/7 in number, to her natal house, Sneh Lata brought that grievance to the notice of her parents who assured her that the demands would be met when a child was born to her. On the birth of a male child on 21.11.1995, her parents gave a sum of Rs.1100/- in cash, silver ornaments, a chain of gold and also a Karra for the child. Even that did not satisfy the appellant. He, through his wife, communicated a grievance to latter’s parents that more money, clothes and articles were required to be provided and that if the demand was not met, Sneh Lata would not be permitted to visit her natal house. 3. On 20.7.1996, Dharam Pal, an uncle of appellant Ram Chander, visited the house of parents of Sneh Lata and informed that Sneh Lata had died and that he had no idea whether she had been killed or she had died a natural death. He also informed them that the cremation would take place the following morning. The parents and brother of Sneh Lata went over to the house of the appellant the following morning and noticed that there were finger marks on the neck of the deceased. 4. The investigation of the case was taken in hand and on the investigating agency recording a finding that Sneh Lata had been done to death, the appellant and (his parents-since acquitted by the Trial Court) were challaned. 5. The ocular presentation qua the accusation against the appellant consists of the statements of PW1 Rajbir Singh brother of the deceased and PW 2 Hazari (an uncle of the deceased). The case was investigated by PW6 SI Zile Singh, then posted as SHO at Police Station, Loharu. 5. The ocular presentation qua the accusation against the appellant consists of the statements of PW1 Rajbir Singh brother of the deceased and PW 2 Hazari (an uncle of the deceased). The case was investigated by PW6 SI Zile Singh, then posted as SHO at Police Station, Loharu. The investigation was verified by the then DSP Incharge of the area. PW3 Dr. P.K. Charaya (along with Dr.N.C. Gabba) had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased and had found the following injuries on the body:- “1. 1½ cm broad ligature mark bluish green in colour was present around the neck along the lower border of the mandible ending at the angles of the mandible on both sides and below the chin in the middle. On dissection underlying tissues were congested and contained blood. 2. Fracture of mandible was present near the chin but no fracture of haematoma was seen. 3. On right side 5th to 8th ribs were fracture anteriorily. Clotted blood was present in the chest wall on dissection. 4. A ligature mark around lower abdomen was present and it was 2 cm broad and was present 3 cm below the umbilicus. On dissection no blood was present in the tissues. 5. A bluish contusion 3 x 3 cm below the right elbow. On dissection congestion of blood was present. 6. 2 x 3 cm bluish contusion was present below left elbow. Tissues congested with blood. 7. 3 x 4 cm contusion blue in colour around right ankle. On dissection tissues were congested with blood. 8. 2 x 2 cm blue contusion just above left ankle. Tissues congested with blood. 9. Fracture of right femur was present in the lower part. On dissection no haemotoma was seen. 10. Dislocation of left hip was present. Tissues were not congested. 11. Major vessels in the neck, on dissection showed lacerations in the inner coats. 12. Fracture of hyoid bone was present.” On receipt of the Forensic Scienece Laboratory report, Dr. P.K. Charaya and Dr. N.C. Gabba indicated “that the cause of death in this case is ‘asphyxias’ due to strangulation, which was ante-mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature.” 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Fracture of hyoid bone was present.” On receipt of the Forensic Scienece Laboratory report, Dr. P.K. Charaya and Dr. N.C. Gabba indicated “that the cause of death in this case is ‘asphyxias’ due to strangulation, which was ante-mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature.” 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Before we proceed to undertake the adjudicatory exercise, we must notice that the appreciation of evidence in a matrimonial offence of this category is hedged by many handicaps which are inbuilt in the societal set up of our country. A bride lives in completely unfamiliar surroundings inasmuch as all the members of her in-laws family are new entrants in her life. If the in-laws of a bride are dis-satisfied with the adequacy of the dowry brought by her, they are hostile in conduct too. Those living in the vicinity of the matrimonial house, though best placed to depose about the goings on at the matrimonial house, would like to refrain from deposing for fear of annoying a life long neighbourer. Further, even if a female is undergoing dowry related torture, she and members of her natal family would like to conceal things for fear of public shame. It is perhaps this realization which weighed in the mind of the law makers in making a provision authorizing drawal of presumptive inferences in the various statutory provisions in the context. The truth has, thus, to be culled out from the attending circumstances. 8. The learned counsel for the appellant argued, albeit in a fairly feeble tone, that there is complete want of evidence to prove that the deceased had been subjected to any dowry-related torture and that the accountability for her death lies at the door of the appellant. 9. There are a number of tell-tale circumstances which would buttress the accusatory prosecution presentation vis-à-vis the appellant. It is common ground, as between PW1 Rajbir Singh and PW2 Hazari (brother and uncle respectively of the deceased), that the appellant (and her acquitted parents) were not available at their house when they (along with other members of the natal family of the deceased) reached there. The matrimonial house of the deceased was a place where a death had taken place and the death was of the daughter-in-law of that family who had left a minor child as well. The matrimonial house of the deceased was a place where a death had taken place and the death was of the daughter-in-law of that family who had left a minor child as well. The absence of the appellant, completely unexplained, from his house would go a long way to prove a guilty intention on his part. In the normal course of things, the appellant ought to have been found mourning the loss of his wife at his house. It also requires particular notice that it is neither the appellant nor his acquitted parents who had intimated the death of Sneh Lata to her parental family. As per the prosecution version, Dharam Pal (an uncle of the appellant) informed the members of natal family of the deceased that she had died and that he had no idea about whether she had been done to death by being drowned in a well or that she had died a natural death by a fall into the well. That categorical attribution to Dharam Pal could only be falsified by the appellant by examining Dharam pal who is none else or other than his own uncle. The statement made by PW 2 Hazari qua that relationship was not challenged in the course of his cross-examination. Dharam Pal aforementioned was not examined at the trial. 10. As per the testimony on oath of Rajbir Singh PW1, Rajesh (younger brother of the appellant) is married to Raj Bala, a younger sister of the deceased. He further testified that Raj Bala has not been sent to the matrimonial house. That part of the statement was owned by PW2 Hazari. Though both these witnesses did not indicate the exact time of marriage of Rajesh with Raj Bala, it is obvious that it must have taken place in the recent past and Raj Bala had not been to the matrimonial house on account of the proven dowry related mis-conduct on the part of the appellant and other members of his family. 11. A husband has a noticeable sense of accountability before the law in the context of the safety of his wife. It is for him to explain the movements of his wife within the precincts of the matrimonial house. 11. A husband has a noticeable sense of accountability before the law in the context of the safety of his wife. It is for him to explain the movements of his wife within the precincts of the matrimonial house. If anything untoward happens to the bride within seven years of the marriage, as in this case, and there is evidence that she had been subjected to dowry- related torture, the presumption arising in the context would nail the husband. 12. The proven fact that the appellant did not himself indicate death of his wife to her natal family and the fact that the appellant (and his acquitted parents) were found missing from the house when the members of the natal family of the deceased reached there as also the fact that Raj Bala has not been sent to her matrimonial house till date are all factors which clinchingly prove the culpability of the appellant in the crime for which he stands convicted. 13. We find, on appraisal of the file, that the Medical Board recorded a finding that the death of the deceased had occurred due to ‘asphyxia’. It is, thus, apparent that the deceased had been strangulated in the first instance and, then, drowned in a well. It compounds the despicable act on the part of the appellant. We are, thus, not inclined to give him benefit in the context of the sentence awarded to him by the Trial Court. 14. Faced with the predicament emerging from the above discussion, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant may be given the benefit of a diluted sentence in order to be able to look after his minor child. The plea merely requires to be noticed to be negatived. Here was a case in which a young female had been done to death by her husband on account of the inability on the part of the members of her natal family to meet the dowry demand raised by her in-laws. The dowry related torture is (scourge) of the present societal environment and the frown of the law, in case of proven culpability cannot be allowed to be diluted in any manner. Dismissed. —————————