JUDGMENT : Five persons were charge-sheeted in this case. Out of them, Santkumar Mishra is absconding. Four persons Raviprakash @ Kuttu, Prakash @ Indraprakash, Vittu @ Satyaprakash and Anil Kumar Mishra were prosecuted out of them Raviprakash @ Kuttu, Prakash @ Indraprakash and Vindu @ Satyaprakash have been acquitted from the charges levelled against them and only Anil Kumar Mishra has been convicted and sentenced, who is before us in this appeal. 2. This Criminal Appeal under section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code has been filed being aggrieved by the judgment, finding and sentence dated 1-3-2005 passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Katni (Fast Track Court) in Sessions Trial No. 74/2004, whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 306 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R. I. for 5 years with fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default of payment of fine R.I. for 6 months and also convicted under section 201 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine R.I. for 1 month. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. 3. Prosecution case in short is that on 27-3-2003 Ramkumar Dubey submitted the written report to S. P., Katni to the effect that marriage of her daughter Sadhna was performed with Anil Kumar Mishra. He was Salesman in Pauniya Society. On 23-3-2003 at 5:00 p.m. he came to know that his daughter has consumed some poisonous substance and her treatment is going on in Civil Hospital, Katni. He immediately rushed there. The condition of his daughter was serious. Thereafter she was referred to Medical College, Jabalpur but appellant admitted her in a private hospital (National Hospital, Jabalpur). There she remained hospitalized for 2 days but he got discharged therefrom. When she was being carried to Civil Hospital, Katni she died on the way. Appellant did not inform to the police. The complainant tried to step down at Sihora from vehicle but appellant did not allow him to do so. He carried deceased to his village Bhatadon where her body was cremated without informing to police and marpeet of complainant was also done there for which he lodged report at Khatoli Chowki. It was also alleged that appellant and his family members used to harass Sadhna and have administered the poison in planned way. Marg was registered. Inquiry was made. He carried deceased to his village Bhatadon where her body was cremated without informing to police and marpeet of complainant was also done there for which he lodged report at Khatoli Chowki. It was also alleged that appellant and his family members used to harass Sadhna and have administered the poison in planned way. Marg was registered. Inquiry was made. It was found that she was abetted to commit suicide by taking poisonous substance as a result thereof she died and her body was cremated with intent to cause disappearance of evidence. Crime No. 92/03 under section 498-A, 304-B, 302, 328, 201, 34 of Indian Penal Code was registered at Police Station Sleemanabad. Map was prepared. Documents and the photographs were seized. The statements of the witnesses were recorded under section 161 of Criminal Procedure Code. After completing the investigation, charge-sheet was filed in the Court of C.J.M. Katni who committed the case on 22-6-2004 to Sessions Court for trial. 4. The appellant was charged under sections 306, 498-A and 201/34 of Indian Penal Code. He abjured the guilt and claimed to be tried mainly contending that he has been falsely implicated. Prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and appellant did not examine any witness. After appreciating the evidence trial Court found him guilty under sections 306 and 201 of Indian Penal Code and convicted and sentenced thereunder as stated hereinabove in para No. 2 of the judgment. Being aggrieved by the judgment, finding and sentence passed by trial Court, instant appeal has been preferred on the grounds mentioned therein. 5. Shri D. S. Chauhan, advocate was engaged by the appellant as his counsel but he did not appear to argue on the dates of on 10-5-2007, 21-8-2007, 10-4-2008 and 24-4-2008. Since the appeal was pending from 2005, therefore, Ku. Manju Pillai was appointed from the panel of High Court Legal Services Committee to argue the matter on behalf of the appellant so that this appeal may be disposed of expeditiously hence arguments were heard. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in proper perspective. It has not been proved that appellant used to harass Sadhna and abetted the commission of suicide, therefore, the finding of guilt is erroneous which deserves to be set aside and appellant is entitled for acquittal. 7. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in proper perspective. It has not been proved that appellant used to harass Sadhna and abetted the commission of suicide, therefore, the finding of guilt is erroneous which deserves to be set aside and appellant is entitled for acquittal. 7. On the contrary, Shri Arun Nema, learned P.L. appearing on behalf of the respondent/State supported the impugned judgment, finding and sentence mainly contending that prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant has rightly been convicted and sentenced, therefore, it does not call for any interference. 8. The main point for consideration in this appeal is that whether trial Court has committed any illegality in convicting and sentencing the appellant under sections 306 and 201 of Indian Penal Code? 9. Gauri Devi (PW-11) is the mother of deceased Sadhna. She has deposed in her evidence that on 23-3-2003 Bablu came to her house and told her to accompany with him as Sadhna has consumed poison, therefore, she went there at the house of appellant and asked to Sadhna as to why she has done so. She apprised that her husband has beaten throughout night and said that if she is the offspring of real father then she should die otherwise she is the offspring of a prostitute. He also said that he will perform another marriage. She also stated that the immovable property has not been given in dowry, therefore, two acres of land, plot, well and house etc. be mutated in his name. 10. She has further deposed that when Ravi asked to Sadhna that why she has done so, she said that it is due to harassment by her husband who used to cause marpeet, extend threats and suspected her. 11. Thus, Gaura Devi (PW-11) has stated that her daughter consumed poison on account of harassment, ill-treatment and causing beating by appellant. She has been subjected to lengthy cross-examination but nothing is elicited to discredit her testimony on the material point. This is the witness who reached there immediately after consuming poisonous substance. Her daughter has apprised her the circumstances in which she consumed poison. It may be treated as her oral dying declaration. There is no reason to disbelieve her statement. There is no reason to falsely implicate him. Her statement is quite natural, probable, trustworthy and reliable. This is the witness who reached there immediately after consuming poisonous substance. Her daughter has apprised her the circumstances in which she consumed poison. It may be treated as her oral dying declaration. There is no reason to disbelieve her statement. There is no reason to falsely implicate him. Her statement is quite natural, probable, trustworthy and reliable. Therefore, it transpires the confidence. The conviction may be based on her sole testimony. 12. Ramkumar (PW-1) is the father of deceased Sadhna. He has also stated that he asked his daughter Sadhna as to why she has done so, she stated that she was badly harassed, therefore, she consumed poison. Thus, this witness has also deposed that his daughter told him the circumstances in which she consumed poison. There is nothing to disbelieve the statement of her father. 13. Maya Bai (PW-5) has also stated that Sadhna told her brother-in-law (Jeth) that appellant used to cause her marpeet, give threats and suspecting her. She could not tolerate such behaviour, therefore, she decided to commit suicide. Thus, this witness has also given the evidence relating to circumstances in which Sadhna committed suicide. 14. Yantri Bai (PW-4) has also deposed that appellant asked her to mutate the land in his own name but she refused. Thus it is clear from her evidence that appellant intended to take landed property from grandmother of deceased and on her refusal he became annoyed and this was also one of the reason of causing harassment of his wife. 15. There is ample evidence that appellant used to harass and commit marpeet with her. She could not tolerate the cruelties subject to her. She was not in a position to fulfil the illegal demand of landed property. Being harassed and frustrated, she ended her life. 16. Sadhna committed suicide and died in her-in-laws house. It is surprising to note that her husband did not inform to the police regarding the consumption of poisonous substance by his wife. His conduct appears mala fide throughout. In spite of the reference to Medical College, Jabalpur he did not carry his wife there but admitted in a private hospital i.e. to say National Hospital, Jabalpur fromwhere also he got discharged on the next day. His conduct appears mala fide throughout. In spite of the reference to Medical College, Jabalpur he did not carry his wife there but admitted in a private hospital i.e. to say National Hospital, Jabalpur fromwhere also he got discharged on the next day. When her condition was so serious that she was kept on dialysis, it was not at all desirable on the part of appellant to get discharge from that hospital at his own risk. The outcome was that she died on the way to Katni. It is again surprising that instead of informing the police he cremated the body of his wife with intent to cause disappearance of evidence to save himself from lawful punishment. 17. Thus, from the oral and documentary evidence available on record, it is manifestly clear that Sadhna consumed poison on account of harassment, ill-treatment, misbehaviour, beating, threatening and illegal demand of landed properties by appellant. She was so harassed that she had no option except to end her life by committing suicide, therefore, prosecution has proved the offence under section 306 of Indian Penal Code beyond reasonable doubt that appellant abetted commission of suicide of his wife. He has cremated her dead body with intent to cause disappearance of evidence to save him from legal clutches. Thus, the offence under section 201 of Indian Penal Code has also been proved. 18. The trial Court has dealt with every aspect of the matter and has rightly arrived at the conclusion regarding the guilt of the appellant, hence the finding of guilt is hereby affirmed. The sentence being not excessive, is also affirmed. The appeal is meritless, hence deserves to be dismissed. 19. Consequently, appeal fails and is dismissed accordingly.