JUDGMENT I.A. Ansari, J. 1. By judgment and order, dated 31.10.2006, passed, in Sessions Case No. 56 (K)/2002, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) No. 1, Kamrup, Guwahati, the present Appellant is convicted under Sections 498A and 306 IPC and he stands sentenced to suffer, for his conviction under Section498A IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one month and to undergo, for his conviction under Section 306 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and six months and fine of Rs. 2,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two months, both the sentences having been directed to run concurrently. 2. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be described thus: Kiron Joshi (since deceased) was legally wedded wife of the Appellant, Major Arvind Joshi, their marriage having been solemnized, on 14.02.1985, at Meerut Cantt. On 10.04.1992, Kiron Joshi's dead body was found hanging by her neck inside the bathroom of their residential accommodation provided to them at Army Officer's Mess of 4 Corps, OMC, Solmara, Tezpur, where the said deceased used to stay with her husband and two male children. Having been informed, over phone, at Gwalior, by the accused that his wife had died, Appellant's father-in-law, Rajendra Kr. Tiwari (PW2), accompanied by his son, Major Neelesh Tiewari (PW11), came to Tezpur and, upon seeing the dead body, they, having suspected that Kiran had been killed by the Appellant, lodged a written Ejahar with Tezpur Police Station alleging, inter alia, that since after her marriage with Arvind Joshi (i.e., the Appellant), Kiran had been tortured by the accused by raising demands for money and other valuable properties and that the informant suspected that Kiran had not committed suicide; rather, she had been killed. Based on this First Information Report, police registered Tezpur Police Station Case No. 359/1992, against the present Appellant, under Sections 498A and 304B IPC. 3. On completion of investigation, police submitted a final report, in the case, on the ground of insufficiency of evidence. By order, dated 01.11.1993, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonitpur, accepted the report. Based on this First Information Report, police registered Tezpur Police Station Case No. 359/1992, against the present Appellant, under Sections 498A and 304B IPC. 3. On completion of investigation, police submitted a final report, in the case, on the ground of insufficiency of evidence. By order, dated 01.11.1993, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonitpur, accepted the report. Aggrieved by the acceptance of the final report, the informant moved the Apex Court and, on the orders of the Apex Court, the case was transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (in short, 'the CBI'). The CBI accordingly registered a case and, on investigation, laid charge-sheet against the Appellant under Sections 498A and 306 IPC. 4. During trial, charges under Sections 498A and 304B IPC were framed against the accused. As the accused pleaded not guilty to the charges so framed against him, the trial proceeded. In support of their case, the prosecution examined as many as 18 witnesses. The accused was, then, examined under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure. In his examination aforementioned, the accused denied that he had committed the offences alleged to have been committed by him, the case of the defence being that of denial inasmuch the accused contended that he had cordial relation with the said deceased, he never subjected her to cruelty and that his wife committed suicide due to strained relation, which her parents had been maintaining with each other, and also due to hostile attitude, which the members of her parental family had been maintaining towards each other. In support of its case, the defence too examined three witnesses. Having found the accused-Appellant guilty of the offences charged with, the learned trial Court convicted him accordingly and passed sentences against him as have been mentioned hereinabove. Aggrieved by his conviction and the sentences passed against him, the convicted person has preferred this appeal. 5. I have heard Dr. L.S. Choudhury, learned Counsel for the accused-Appellant, and Mr. B. Buragohain, learned Standing Counsel, CBI. 6. Appearing on behalf of the accused-Appellant, Dr. Choudhury has submitted that the letters, which the deceased had written to her mother and her husband, and a number of greeting cards, which the deceased had sent to her husband, contain ample proof of the happy and cordial relation, which the deceased shared with her husband. These letters also reflect, contends Dr. Appearing on behalf of the accused-Appellant, Dr. Choudhury has submitted that the letters, which the deceased had written to her mother and her husband, and a number of greeting cards, which the deceased had sent to her husband, contain ample proof of the happy and cordial relation, which the deceased shared with her husband. These letters also reflect, contends Dr. Choudhury, that the deceased used to be deeply disturbed over the hostile relation, which her parents maintained with each other, and the strained relation, which her two brothers. maintained with each other. The whole atmosphere in the parental family of the deceased, according to Dr. Choudhury, had subjected the deceased to extreme mental pressure and strain and it is quite possible that the deceased, being unable to bear such high degree of mental pressure, committed suicide. This apart, points out Dr. Choudhury, the elder sister of the deceased had also committed suicide and, hence, it is quite possible that either due to situation in her parental family or due to suicidal tendency, which prevails in her parental family, the deceased put an end to her life. At any rate, submits Dr. Choudhury, there is no cogent and credible evidence on record convincingly proving that the deceased had ever been subjected to cruelty by her husband and/or her husband having raised any demand for money or any valuable property. In fact, submits Dr. Choudhury, the Appellant had been helping the parental family of the deceased in various ways. Dr. Choudhury also submits that the Appellant had never, according to the overwhelming evidence on record, put restrictions on the use of money by the said deceased inasmuch as the Appellant and his wife, at all relevant point of time, used to maintain joint account in the banks and the Appellant, within the limited financial means, never let his wife or children suffer financially. The accusations made against the Appellant that he had demanded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- from the father of the deceased and/or that the Appellant had been assaulting his wife and had once, in the process of kicking his wife, sustained fracture in his foot and that the accused had demanded bangle and had taken away other valuable properties, such as, VCR, from the parental house of the deceased, are, according to Dr. 25,000/- from the father of the deceased and/or that the Appellant had been assaulting his wife and had once, in the process of kicking his wife, sustained fracture in his foot and that the accused had demanded bangle and had taken away other valuable properties, such as, VCR, from the parental house of the deceased, are, according to Dr. Choudhury, false and utterly unbelievable inasmuch as the evidence adduced, in this regard, by the prosecution, are full of inherent contradictions. It is further submitted by Dr. Choudhury that the learned trial Court has not taken into account the evidence, which appeared in favour of the accused, in their proper prospective, and, while relying upon the evidence given by the prosecution witnesses, failed to take note of the inherently incredible pieces of evidence with which suffer the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. In such circumstances, the Appellant, contends Dr. Choudhury, ought not to have been convicted and, hence, his conviction may be set aside and he may be acquitted. 7. Controverting the submissions made on behalf of the Appellant, Mr. Buragohain, learned Standing Counsel, CBI, has submitted that there might have some variations in the evidence given by various prosecution witnesses as regards the prosecution's case against the accused-Appellant that he had subjected his wife to cruelty, such variations were minor and did not materially affect the substratum of the prosecution's case. This apart, the letters, written by the deceased to her mother, and other evidence on record are clear proof, contends Mr. Buragohain, that the Appellant had been torturing his wife by raising demands for money and valuable properties and the Appellant's wife, being unable to bear the mental and physical pressure put on her, ended her life by committing suicide leaving two small children. In such circumstances, the conviction of the accused-Appellant for the offences, which have been proved to have been committed by him, are not legally interferable and may, therefore, be maintained. Even the sentences passed against the accused-Appellant, according to Mr. Buragohain, are very lenient and may not be disturbed. 8. While considering this appeal, what needs to be pointed out, at the very out set, is that the fact that the deceased had committed suicide is an admitted fact inasmuch as the clear findings of Dr. Even the sentences passed against the accused-Appellant, according to Mr. Buragohain, are very lenient and may not be disturbed. 8. While considering this appeal, what needs to be pointed out, at the very out set, is that the fact that the deceased had committed suicide is an admitted fact inasmuch as the clear findings of Dr. A.C. Saikia (PW5) are that the deceased had no injury except an oblique non-continuous ligature mark above her thyroid cartilage, the injury being ante mortem in nature and the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of hanging. These findings have not been disputed nor the opinion of PW5 that the deceased had committed suicide was, at any stage of the trial, disputed by the prosecution and/or by the defence. 9. Coupled with the above, what needs to be noted is that though the prosecution have examined as many as 18 witnesses, the material witnesses are PW1 (Pramila Tiwari), who is mother of the deceased, PW2 (Rajendra Kr. Tiwari), who is informant and the father of the deceased, PW11 (Major Neelesh Tiwari), who is the brother of the deceased), PW12 Raju Khanna, is a retired teacher, who claims to be known to both the deceased as well as the accused, PW13 (Raju Sarma) is one of the friends of Major Neelesh Tiwari (PW11), PW14 (Usha Vajpayee) is aunt of the deceased, she being younger sister of the informant, PW15 (Debendar Kr. Vajpayee) is the husband of PW14 and PW16 (Madhab Tiwari) is younger brother of the informant. Even the learned trial Court has mentioned in its judgment that these witnesses, who have been named hereinbefore, are the material witnesses. 10. Before entering into the merit of this appeal, what also needs to be pointed out is that the prosecution has adduced evidence to bring out four incriminating circumstances. There is evidence, as deposed to by the members of the parental family of the deceased, their friends and relatives, who claim that the accused, according to what the deceased had reported to them, had been harassing and torturing the deceased. The mother of the deceased even claims to have witnessed her daughter being beaten by her husband. It is, in this context, that the prosecution claims that the Appellant, in the process of kicking the deceased, had sustained fracture on his foot inasmuch as his kick fell on a sofa. The mother of the deceased even claims to have witnessed her daughter being beaten by her husband. It is, in this context, that the prosecution claims that the Appellant, in the process of kicking the deceased, had sustained fracture on his foot inasmuch as his kick fell on a sofa. As regards the demand for money or valuable security, the witnesses claim, inter alia, that the Appellant had demanded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- from the parents of the deceased. In support of this accusation, reliance was heavily placed on a letter written by the deceased to her mother and a letter, which the mother of the accused had written to the mother of the deceased. These letters are, however, relied upon by the defence too to show that the money about which mentions were made, in the two letters aforementioned, did not constitute any demand from the parents of the deceased; rather, the money, in question, belonged to the deceased and her husband and the deceased and her husband were merely asking the money, in question, to be brought to Meerut. In support of their accusation that the Appellant had been a greedy person, the prosecution also alleges that the Appellant had raised demand for a pair of bangles from the parents of the deceased. There is also allegation that the behaviour of the deceased towards her parents-in-law was highly insulting and this was Anr. instance of mental cruelty to which the deceased had been subjected by the accused. 11. Let me, now, scan minutely the evidence on record relating to the above incriminating circumstances appearing against the accused-Appellant. Before I do so, it is imperative that I point out to the relevant contents of the letters and greetings cards, which the defence have relied upon in order to sustain their plea that as far as the relation between the deceased and her husband was concerned, the same was cordial inasmuch as the Appellant had always been very loving and caring towards his wife, his children and even to the paternal family of the deceased. 12. Ext. K, dated 01.01.1986, Ext. L, dated 13.02.1987, Ext. N, dated 02.03.1987, Ext. U, dated 14.02.1987, are all letters written by the deceased to her husband. Ext. M, dated. Nil, Ext. O, dated 15.03.1987, Ext. P, dated. Nil, Ext. Q, dated 05.05.1989, Ext. R, dated. Nil, Ext. S, dated 14.02.1991, Ext. T, dated. 12. Ext. K, dated 01.01.1986, Ext. L, dated 13.02.1987, Ext. N, dated 02.03.1987, Ext. U, dated 14.02.1987, are all letters written by the deceased to her husband. Ext. M, dated. Nil, Ext. O, dated 15.03.1987, Ext. P, dated. Nil, Ext. Q, dated 05.05.1989, Ext. R, dated. Nil, Ext. S, dated 14.02.1991, Ext. T, dated. Nil, are all Cards, which had been sent by the deceased to her husband on various occasions, such as, holi, wedding anniversary, her husband's birth day. Apart from these letters and the greeting cards, Ext. E, dated 15.02.1992, Ext. F, dated 02.06.1990, Ext. G, dated 09.07.1990, Ext. H, dated 19.03.1991, and Ext. I, dated 25.07.1991, are the letters written by the deceased to her mother (PW1). Ext. J is the relevant diary, written and maintained by the deceased in the year 1989. 13. Let me, now, take note of the contents of the above documentary pieces of evidence. The translated versions of the relevant contents of these documentary evidence are extracted below: Exhibit F: (Page 104-105) 2nd Jun 1990. Suratgarh My Dear Mummy With regards Perhaps you may get both of my letters at the at the same time. First letter I had written in anger and sadness. But when I shouted on Bunny for drinking milk first he also grumbled but after drinking he asked me will you become my mother now, really mummy, upon this I could not stop my self. You have not even set me any Birthday card. I feel now blessing are not required. Your house and animals are dearer to you and daddy than your children. Whether you give me something or not it hardly matters for me, what matters is how much time and affection you have for your children. Since you and Daddy have been fighting because of your relatives and result is in front of you that both side people had been taking undue advantage of both of you and your own children too went off far away from you because of your fights. Though. Neelu and Manu are your own sons but still they do not have faith and trust on you and Daddy like me. Everybody is taking benefit out of it. Neelu and Manu always fight with each other and are eager to eat each other. At times. Though. Neelu and Manu are your own sons but still they do not have faith and trust on you and Daddy like me. Everybody is taking benefit out of it. Neelu and Manu always fight with each other and are eager to eat each other. At times. I feel that I may not be able to meet you and then I feel where to go after leaving you. Mom you have been suffering throughout since beginning. Mummy, if you have a bit feeling for your fighter daughter then come to me immediately on receipt of this letter. Daddy neither has time for us nor does he need us. He always says why to visit the children, if we all also have the same feeling then why we should visit. You and daddy may think it a waste of time while visiting at the Mundan Ceremony (first hair cut) of the children. Neither this ceremony is of any importance for Neelu and Manu. Perhaps the company of their friends is more necessary for them. Mom, you can have everything on hire but not mother, father, brother & sister. Mummy truly speaking I fought with you only because since marriage and till end you had associated only your own relatives and now you have seen the result. Any way that what has happened and my anger also had its own way. Now since I no more remain your family member that's why you neither spoke to me on phone nor wrote letter and what I have to listen in Meerut on that account gets opened for always and because of which mummy (mother-in-law) and Anita had to face embarrassment at the hands of Col. Mishra and Mrs. Mishra. Till now whatever self-respect I could have that too has been finished. Any way this was to happen one day. Hardly have I seen all of you laughing-talking together. Still if possible come in October but do not repeat the same. Mummy if you can spare time for your children then it will be nice. Don't just try do come over. Lots of love and regards from all of us. The photos which we clicked there have come very nice. Take care of your health. You may not require & need us but we require & need you till our end. Your fighter cock Daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Exbt. G 9th July, 1990. Don't just try do come over. Lots of love and regards from all of us. The photos which we clicked there have come very nice. Take care of your health. You may not require & need us but we require & need you till our end. Your fighter cock Daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Exbt. G 9th July, 1990. My Dear Mother With regards I had received your letter long back but here it's too hot & kids got prickly heat. Now there is change in weather a bit then only kids become alright. Nowadays he (Arvind) is busy in preparing for part 'D' examination. My little bird has started walking now. He has got his two upper teeth completely. He has become very naughty. He escapes from our eyes and get on to window and shout and feels happy. H does not leave bunny at all. Whatever Bunny does even he also does the same. He wants to eat the same what bunny ate and whatever elder has taken he wants the same thing. Bunny has become more understanding now and his study is going on well. After returning from the school he at his own changes his uniform and keeps things in their respecting places and does his homework. For me only work of teaching and making him learn is left. Do write me after Daddy's final. Please write how is Neelu and Jaya are doing also write as to what happen to Manu's posting? When you will get my letter by that time, you must have left from Jhansi for maternal Grand mother's death anniversary. After that when you will go to Pune then writ me. Mummy if you require kota Saree from there then writ me. Here Raisthani Bandhani Sarees are also available at very cheap. Silk Bandhani Sarees are available at Khadi Gramo Udyog in October in the range of 115/to 300/- and Kota Sarees with good quality of Zari boarder in the range of 88/- to 151/-. Mummy please keep writing letter to me. When maternal grand mother was there she was illeterate and so was Mousi (mother's sister) so you know how they were dependent on Ors. Whatever feeling you were having with your mother, I too have the same for you. Once I get letter I feel everything is alright. Mummy please keep writing letter to me. When maternal grand mother was there she was illeterate and so was Mousi (mother's sister) so you know how they were dependent on Ors. Whatever feeling you were having with your mother, I too have the same for you. Once I get letter I feel everything is alright. I do not have the addresses of Neelu and Manu to write letters. Whatever good or bad. I speak. I can speak either to you or to him (Arvind). Besides this what can I say to anyone else or explain that how I feel when Ors. disturb the peace of your family. Mummy to keep yourself like open book is nothing; but, just to get lauehed upon yourself. It is always not necessary that the other person also understands your feelings. Hence it is better to maintain a distance so that the relationship could not get spoilt. It is not wise to give undue importance to anyone and allow him to sit on your head and later on they insult you. I think you must have understood and got my points. Rest all is fine. Kids are having fun. Mummy walks and a lot and Bummy is busy with his studies. Mummy (Arvind's mother) is in Meerut only. For her eyes' treatment, she has to stay there. We may come but it is not sure. Convey my love and regards to Mouse (Aunty). You must be speaking to daddy on phone. Convey from our side that we remember him. In marriage since kids were unwell, hence full time passed just like that. OK Mom do write letter. Yours Daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Ext. V. Jabalpur, 17.02.91 Dear Arvind and Kiran With love & regards "Happy New Year" I wish happy and prosperous year to all of you including son bunni & Mini Banni. We also congratulate you for having allotment of house near Meerut.Accordingly as per message from Kiran's Daddy, we decided to sell your plot No. F-19 in our coop. society. I had discussion with Kiran's mummy & daddy on phone and finally come to conclusion to dispose off the plot. Otherwise also in my opinion it is better to sell it now without investing any amount for Boundary wall etc whatever you have invested you know. I want to sell it for Rs. 90,000/- (approx). society. I had discussion with Kiran's mummy & daddy on phone and finally come to conclusion to dispose off the plot. Otherwise also in my opinion it is better to sell it now without investing any amount for Boundary wall etc whatever you have invested you know. I want to sell it for Rs. 90,000/- (approx). At present people are ready to pay around 85000/- to 87000/- but I would sell it around 89000 - 90000/- & the registration extra which will be borne by purchaser. It will be finalized within a weeks time. In the meantime you are requested to send the original registration deed with original money receipt (photo copies to be kept with you) so that I can submit the same to society & plot can be sold out through society without the presence of Smt. Kiran Joshi but an undertaking is required to be send as under: To, President SGNSS Maryolit JBP. I am ready to surrender my plot No. F-19 at Sainik Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti, Maryooit JBP to the society subject to the condition that it is sold out by Society to anybody and proper value after sell is given to the undersigned. Kindly send the amount to the undersigned by DD. Yours faithfully (Smt. Kiran Joshi) Encls: Original MR's & Registration Deed Further it is informed that the original papers be sent to me through registered AD. On submissions of these documents to society. I shall arrange to send you the entire amount through DD to be prepared in the name of Smt. Kiran Joshi (A/C payee payable at Meerut). I am going to Gwalior on 25th or 26th Feb, 91 & shall be back by 28th. Rest is fine. Awaiting your reply. Please convey my love to Kiran & Kids Yours sincerely Devendra (Emphasis is supplied) Ext H 19 March, 91. Suratgarh Respected Maa With regards I had received your letter. Few days back Col Sardesai's letter too I got. He wrote that his car to be left with us. But till April-May we cannot say anything because posting may come by that time or it may not come, and we may have to stay for one more year here. Earlier Bunny then Munni both got tonsil infected now they are fine. I am trying for Bunny exam to be over as early as possible. But till April-May we cannot say anything because posting may come by that time or it may not come, and we may have to stay for one more year here. Earlier Bunny then Munni both got tonsil infected now they are fine. I am trying for Bunny exam to be over as early as possible. If could be possible by 2nd week of April the exams will be over. We will be leaving from here only after getting him admitted in Anr. school. First we will go to Meerut from there to farm, then Nainital and back to Meerut. Dinnis Bhaiya's both sons also have gone to Sherwood. Vijay Chachajee younger son and Kanta Auntijee's son is also there. Early in my we will come to Gwalior and then till leave finishes we will stay there and then come back to Suratgarh. In June I will stay back with you only. In the last week of June I will go back to Suratgarh. Baby & Anita will meet in May at Meerut. If programme changes further I will write to you. Manu might be reaching within few days. Neelu will also come by next month. Yes Mom, you had written about Neelu in your previous letter. Col Sardesai also wrote in his letter that Neelu fought with his C.O. and came and rang up to Daddy. And that's why Daddy had to rush. Then Col Sardesai and Daddy had spoken to him. I do not know what happened thereafter. We may get his core changed once he obtains PC (permanent commission). You let him cry and tell Daddy that he should do whatever he can at his own level without asking Neelu. Anyway almighty should take care. After thinking all this only he (Arvind) gets disturb and worried that what's the matter and why Neelu is like this. He (Arvind) is saving that this time in Gwalior he'll speak in details with Neelu and with Daddy too. However, this can be done only when we meet. We may first come to Gwalior and then after celebrating the first wedding anniversary of Neelu we may go to Meerut. Anyway I will write Anr. letter to you soon. Yes Maa. He (Arvind) is saving that this time in Gwalior he'll speak in details with Neelu and with Daddy too. However, this can be done only when we meet. We may first come to Gwalior and then after celebrating the first wedding anniversary of Neelu we may go to Meerut. Anyway I will write Anr. letter to you soon. Yes Maa. Soon I will send Registry of Jabalpur plot by hand through someone, because it is kept in locker at Meerut, I will be able to send it to you only after visiting Meerut. You tell the Phupha (uncle) that in April only will be able to send the same to him and further ask him as to how much the plot can fetch. These days Bunny is busy in his studies, also the course is too much. Bunny has become much more naughty. He speaks a lot. Rest everything is fine. There is nothing known about posting. Have you shifted your house? Write who is in Tansen Nagar house now? OK I stop now. If you require anything from here then write. Accept regards to you & daddy from our side and lots of love to Nana and Nani from the children. Bunny remembers you a lot. Now a days, he just counting the remaining days when he will go to you. Ask Manu to come through Suratgarh if possible. Bunny will also go with him to Gwalior. It may be possible that we all may come together. As far as I think, Manu can leave his unit only after 8th of April, as 8th April is our AOC day. However, please reply me as soon as you receive my letter. Please take care of your & daddy's health. Don't get unnecessary worry with the dogs (pets). Please write whether Shashi has come or not. I will not be keeping any servant now. Within one or two years Chotu will also start going to school; hence, its not required. Now also without servant I am at ease. Chotu has also gradually started participating in the activities with Bunny. Nice it is. Anyway Maa, talks will never end but paper will. Rest on meeting with lots of love. Your spoilt daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Ext. I 25th July, 91. Suratgarh Dear Maa With regards I did not receive any of your letter. Chotu has also gradually started participating in the activities with Bunny. Nice it is. Anyway Maa, talks will never end but paper will. Rest on meeting with lots of love. Your spoilt daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Ext. I 25th July, 91. Suratgarh Dear Maa With regards I did not receive any of your letter. You and Joya are fine and how is daddy? Write. Bunny has got admission in Sacred Heart school. He leaves quite early. Quarter to 7 his vehicle comes and quarter to 2 he comes back. His course is also too much. That is why he does not get much time. Bunny has become more naughty and speaks quite lot. Hardly it is matter of one year than he too will go to school. At Delhi Manu came to drop us. You people surely see the girl at Bareilly and if possible fix marriage in winters, but fix it in the month of October during vacations of Dashera otherwise I may come only for a week. Nowadays Neelu is here and he often visit us. On 2nd or 3rd he will go to Faridkot. He may be calling you on telephone. He will come to you for few days after taking leave. How is Joya, I do not know whether she could adjust here or not? What else she can do? When I see her I remember my time when he (Arvind) went on exercise for two months and 10 days leave he got again for four months for exercise he came here. Anyway like this only the time passes. Rest everything is fine. Now Maa I stop here otherwise he will go arid letter will not be posted. Rest latter on. From kids side regards and love. From his (Arvind) side also love and high regards. Tell Uncleji (Phuphaii) in Jabalpur to send money soon. About 50-60 in white in my name rest through draft in Maa's (Arvind's mother name). Tell him to do immediately. We have to deposit money in September otherwise house will go away from hand, I will latter write separately to him. Your daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Ext E 15th Feb, 92. Suratgarh My dear Maa With regards I got your card but did not get any letter from you. Prior to this, I wrote a postcard to you hurriedly. Perhaps you must have not got it. Your daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Ext E 15th Feb, 92. Suratgarh My dear Maa With regards I got your card but did not get any letter from you. Prior to this, I wrote a postcard to you hurriedly. Perhaps you must have not got it. Maa Bunny's exam will be over from 24 to 27th Feb. Mummy (Arvind's mother) and Bunny will go to Meerut by 1st March. On 5th March truck will proceed to Meerut from here. He (Arvind) has got your sofa set prepare. Two switch boards have also been prepared. I got letter from Joya. Neelu may come in March here for field firing. This is what Joya had written to me. But we may go before that from here. We will start from Suratgarh on 6th March and on 7th we will reach Delhi. From Delhi I will ring up to you. On 16th March the truck will start from Meerut to Tezpur. We have got reservation for 28th March from Tinsukia. We will reach Delhi on 19th and on 20th we will board the train. Maa I may not be able to come because of tight schedule. You and daddy come and meet me in Meerut. Rest will tell you on phone after reaching Delhi on 11th March he (Arvind) will reach Meerut. Only I have to get unloaded the luggage from the truck and further to arrange Anr. truck at Meerut. It may be possible that he (Arvind) may come to Meerut, a day before holi. Rai will come along with truck. Till Meerut, Das will accompany the truck. OK Maa, when you come, bring Rs. 25,000/- out of that money. Here we have to pay the installment of the plot. Maa get some ghee. Nothing else; Rest everything is fine. My packing is almost over. Few kitchen utensils are left. OK Mummy, Maa I stop it here otherwise letter will not get posted in time. From all of us you and Daddy accept our regards and lots of love. From Mummy's side Namastey. Your daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Ext I 6th March Meerut Cantt. Dear sister Lata Shuv Ashirbad I have come back from kids. I tried so many times to make telephone call to you but again and again exchange people tell - number is not correct. I was told the number as 29902. From Mummy's side Namastey. Your daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Ext I 6th March Meerut Cantt. Dear sister Lata Shuv Ashirbad I have come back from kids. I tried so many times to make telephone call to you but again and again exchange people tell - number is not correct. I was told the number as 29902. Today again the telephone could not be through to you. Hence, I am writing this letter to you. Luggage truck has arrived on 4th. Kids will reach Meerut on 12th Morning. Dear daughter Kiran is not having much time to come to you. You come and meet her. Too far away posting has come. Dear Arvind had told that bring Rs. 25.000/- draft while coming in Arvind's name. Dear Bunny has come along with me. Rest is fine. How is the health of both of you? You must be getting latter from the children. Let me know about their well being. My blessings to both of you and lots of love to the children. Your sister Kusum Joshi (Emphasis is supplied) Ext J (1) 4 February 89, Saturday It is indeed very true that past reflects in ones present. Yes and a disturbed past cannot give a smooth future. I had been through away similar life and I certainly accept and realize the grave drawbacks of it. That has made me such a unpleasant person all in total. I love my family, my children and my husband. I do not want to pass bad things to my tender buds or to my bright upcoming better half. It often forces me to think what best and how I can contribute to them. But my fluctuating thinking and irresistible emotional attachment to the past does not give me any forceful opportunity to try my best for all. As a child girl I quite well remember the faces and the immoral acts of such males who were around the family moving with quite a respect and be loyalist to my elders. My parents as far as I remember never had a pleasing relation until late when their kids are no longer staving with them. My father does not have a financially sound background. He had a tuff life to struggle with. His life only demanded. My parents as far as I remember never had a pleasing relation until late when their kids are no longer staving with them. My father does not have a financially sound background. He had a tuff life to struggle with. His life only demanded. (Emphasis is supplied) Ext W 6th April, 92 Tezpur Dear Anita Di, Charansparsh A very very happy B' day to you from all of us here. Sorry the late wish as I was looking forward for a visit to you which just could not materialize. So as always hope you'll forgive us for the same. Did Joe have got Dippy's telegram from Meerut that he is starting by Brahmaputra Mail on 6th April for Alipurduwar. The telegram was for Jija but with our address on top. He probably must have lost your address. We tried to contact you through Vartak people from here and hope by now you must have got our message. Didi we are still in the mess. Our stay at Misamari/Tezpur will be decided till 11th April as these people have taken up the case with the Corps HQ's. So you hold Dippy back till our final move. Our Mess Phone No. is 6295. If possible you give us a ring back. Since we have landed up here life is in a spin will whole lot of jing bang of our Corps day which is on the 8th. Joe is on with his job but no chair yet. Kids keep eating my head the whole day. Specially Bunny keep telling us that it would have been better if we would have been let him go with you. I am also feeling the same. I really feel, I should have got down with Ma. Anyway Ma waiting for our fate to be decided. Our lots of love to Sunny & Shuru and warm regards to Jija and Ma. Didi if possible then ring up Baby and pass on to her if she could send puran along with Dippy. I do not know when you'll got this letter but in case its not later then. Rest all is fine. Love and regards from Bunny - Honey & Joe. Your affly Kiran. Ext K Roorkee I am missing you very much. Lets see how long I am being able to resist myself from you. I do not know when you'll got this letter but in case its not later then. Rest all is fine. Love and regards from Bunny - Honey & Joe. Your affly Kiran. Ext K Roorkee I am missing you very much. Lets see how long I am being able to resist myself from you. Anyhow you know me well and so you know my power to resist things________very specially YOU. So darling it should not surprise you if I drop in D-Doon much before 26th Jan, 86. Be always prepared my love. Joe it has been so long after I am writing to you. I never wish to write letters to you now because I never wish to depart from you. Really Joe I cannot stay without vou. Ext K 1st Jan, 1986 For My dearest man__________my husband Thanks for everything you give. May your all wishes and dreams come true not only in this year 1986 but in all coming years Have a happy and prosperous new year. With lots of love and regards. Yours Kinni. (Emphasis is supplied) Ext L 13th Feb, 87 Dear Darling Joe, Just now received your letter along with the beautiful present. I can never be indebted by just saying thanks because the feelings behind it is unlimited and cannot be put in words. Your love and caring is what I am always receiving from past two years and I know it will never fade off. I know it will increase even more as the time flies off and we old couple will be always the same. I am sending a cassette and vault for you. I hope you will accept this very small present from me and your son. - BUT IT IS NOT LIKE HAVING YOU HERE. I do not know what else to present. Love Kinni. (Emphasis is supplied) Ext M 2nd anniversary My dearest Joe Every time every moment I have lived with you has given me a immense feeling of caring-Sharing, loving and owing a wonderful world. A sense of possessiveness and security has always been around me like my own shadow - it is your love dear that is always around me and give me a lot of strength whenever I felt weak. A sense of possessiveness and security has always been around me like my own shadow - it is your love dear that is always around me and give me a lot of strength whenever I felt weak. Yes, all these times those days and nights have changed but the feeling of love is still as new as your first touch and at every step it says LOVE IS GREAT. Kinni (Emphasis is supplied) Ext N 2nd March, 2007 Monday Pairipauna Dear Joe Just now we received a letter from Manu. He has got AOC and has been posted to 28th Inf. Div. DOU. He does not know the location of it and even we do not know. But it is surely thrilling to hear about having Anr. officer of AOC in our family. Many and Dad are highly thrilled and me too. Truly. Joe you have brought boon to all of us and you are too damn lucky for Tiwaris. I am proud of being your dear Lady. Just now dad found out of his location. It is in Leh and Dad is happy about the thing that his milk supply is on to his div-location side. Rest you knew how beneficial it would be when dad is at such a position. Dad will be going to only at AHQ regarding your job. Hope God Almighty fulfills all your wishes and dreams and give you happiness in every way. That is all what a lady wishes for her man. Bunna is fine and runs around calling his "Papapapa". Rest is all well. Do reply soon. With love and regards Kinni. (Emphasis is supplied) Ext O 15th March, 87 Holi Pairipauna Dear Joe Missing yon a lot on this fabulous day. Bauji and Ranna & Manu all are here but I miss my special person (U). Never mind My Holi does not complete without putting colour on you and it shall be done through may be little late. Happy Holi. Lovingly yours Kinni (Emphasis is supplied) Ext P Special and very special Joe I LOVE YOU Your love has always been a special way of great warmth and thoughtfulness which a wife of a women and a mother needs from her better halt. This has been yours specially to understand me and help me remarkably every time I need of you. This has been yours specially to understand me and help me remarkably every time I need of you. I am highly honoured and blessed to be your wife and pray to almighty for giving me a chance to serve you on this special way. I can never indebted to you. Thank you for everything Joe. (Emphasis is supplied) Ext P DEAR PAPA HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU FROM: BUNNY A loving birthday message to hope your fondest dreams come true...for no one in the world deserves more happiness than you. Have a wonderful Birthday. With lots of love, good wishes and regards Yours as always Kinni (Emphasis is supplied) Ext R My dear dear dear Joe I will never change specially in this field of sending you cards. You are a extraordinary person to me. An extraordinary lover An extra affectionate friend An extra understanding husband An extra supporting best half An extra loving man An extra handsome officer An extra generous mate An all all all extra good mine * * * BECAUSE I AM EXTREMELY FOND OF YOU My lots & lots & lots & lots & all Love to you & regards Your second half - Kinni Ext S 14th Feb, 91. Dearest hubby, Love is you It's always nice to look back all these loving unforgettable moments of life with you. Love & Love Yours Kinni Ext T 1st Anniversary My loving Joe It reminds me of my first year of new life that I started with you. Tender soft delicate and new beautiful buds of our new lives and along with the time how beautiful they have grown into colourful flowers. With love for you Yours Kinni Ext-U 14th Feb, 87 Dehradun Capt. Arvind Joshi My Darling loving Joe Paripauna, I received your loving letter and present yesterday from your man Havaldar Khayali Ram. I was since past few weeks planning to visit my home at least once and check up everything. I am slightly worried about the state of the house as last time we found most of the things in bad shape and fungus on them. So today I reached here along with Ms. KC Sharma (whose husband is serving under Dad) with Hav. Khayali Ram. When I reached here I was really very much thankful to God for keeping our house in a good and safe way. Nath is here. So today I reached here along with Ms. KC Sharma (whose husband is serving under Dad) with Hav. Khayali Ram. When I reached here I was really very much thankful to God for keeping our house in a good and safe way. Nath is here. He was asking about bunny and wanted to see him also I found your Rajai and a thermo flask which are really very good. Rather I was wanting to write to you for these Rajai. I am really extremely lucky for having you as my best half throughout my life. What life actually means is what I learnt from you and it should be lead I am still learning. But the process becomes all the more easier and clear when you and your strong love is next to me. Few days back I received a letter from Ma. She is in a perfect shape. After attending Anils marriage she had gone to Farm and then after to Modinagar as Taiji was at Modi Nagar. Anu has been blessed with a girl. Ma has written to her. I don't have her add. Vinod had come to Meerut from Pathankot to pick up Ma as Anita is not well and Dineshji was also not there. But Vinod could not meet Ma because she had gone to Modinagar. So Ma has gone to Pathankot now. She has not written regarding her coming back to Meerut. After stepping into my house I felt so good that I cannot describe. I am now just wanting for you to come back an once again fill this house with the lovely fragrance of home sweet home. This time it has really been too long leaving home. I and Bunny wait for the master to return. I am really missing you here very much. Joe, when other officers can take few days time and go to meet their families then why can't you? Try to look us up if possible. We shall be at Ambala. And Joe dear why do you writ 'Do' to me. My dear husband I am your wife and you can write emotional good loving letters at least and not just receive my mail and note the contents by receiving few cards. Anyway sweetheart I am sending you a package so that you can enjoy and celebrate our Anniversary. And Joe dear why do you writ 'Do' to me. My dear husband I am your wife and you can write emotional good loving letters at least and not just receive my mail and note the contents by receiving few cards. Anyway sweetheart I am sending you a package so that you can enjoy and celebrate our Anniversary. Raima will be coming in the beginning of March along with Manu and her folks. Rest all fine at this end. Try to take out sometime for us. Love Kinni I shall be going back on Monday morning to Ambala. Here at Dehradun our house is in a good and perfect condition. Nothing has got spoiled this time. (Emphasis is supplied) 14. By Exhibit F (dated 02.06.1990), the deceased has expressed her anguish at the lack of time and affection, which her parents were giving to her. Notwithstanding the denial by her parents, Exhibit F, which the deceased had written to her mother, clearly shows that her parents had been, as contended by the defence, quarreling with each other and it is because of the constant fight, which her parents had with each other, their sons, including PW 11, had left their parents. In fact, lifting all veils of secrecy, the deceased wrote in her letter (Ext F) that her brothers. had no faith and trust in her parents. The deceased has also noted, in Ext. F, that her brothers. had been fighting with each other and, in fact, they were eager to eat up each other. 15. In Ext. F, the deceased has also expressed her resentment against her father by saying that her father has neither time for her (the deceased nor does he need her. 16. Though PW1 has claimed that on the occasion of 'Mundaan' ceremony, the accused had quarrelled on the ground that no gift had been given from the parental side of Kiran, Ext. F shows that the deceased had expressed her anguish that neither her parents thought of visiting the deceased and her family on the occasion of 'Mundaan' ceremony of their grand-children nor did her brothers. have time to pay a visit on the occasion to her home. 17. In her letter (Ext. F), the deceased has clearly written that she had hardly seen her family members talking and laughing together. 18. have time to pay a visit on the occasion to her home. 17. In her letter (Ext. F), the deceased has clearly written that she had hardly seen her family members talking and laughing together. 18. In Exhibit G, the deceased has written that whatever good or bad, she has to say, she can speak only to her mother or her husband and to none else. 19. The letter (Ext. J) has been written after marriage of PW 11 and, in this letter, Kiran has written that since her children were unwell, time passed away quickly. This letter gives absolutely no indication that there was any unpleasant scene created by the accused or any unpleasant demand raised by the accused. 20. Exhibit H (19.03.91) is a letter, which transpires to have been written after her brother had quarrel in the army, and, in this letter, the deceased had clearly stated that her husband got disturbed and was worried as to why her brother, Neelu (PW11), behaves like this and that her husband said that he would discuss this matter, at Gwalior, in detail with both her brother, i.e. Neelu (PW 2) and her father. 21. In Exhibit H, the deceased has written that she will soon send the Sale Deed of Jabalpur, by hand, through someone and that it is kept in a locker in Meerut and that she requested her mother to tell her uncle (PW 15) that they would be able to send the Sale Deed in April and he must find out as to how much the plot would fetch. 22. By Exhibit I (dated 25.07.91), the deceased requested her mother to ask PW 15 to send money soon and that an amount of Rs. 50,000/- or Rs. 60,000/- shall be sent in white and the rest shall be sent by way of draft in the name of her husband, Arvind, because the money was required for the purpose of paying installment in the month of September; otherwise, the allotment of the land would lapse. 23. By Exhibit E (dated 15.02.92), the deceased had written to her mother that she (her mother) should, along with her father (PW 2) come and meet them at Meerut, where her husband (i.e., the accused) would also reach on 11th March and, while coming, she (her mother) should bring Rs. 25,000/-'out of that money'. 24. 23. By Exhibit E (dated 15.02.92), the deceased had written to her mother that she (her mother) should, along with her father (PW 2) come and meet them at Meerut, where her husband (i.e., the accused) would also reach on 11th March and, while coming, she (her mother) should bring Rs. 25,000/-'out of that money'. 24. Exhibit J (i.e., notings in the diary of the deceased) clearly shows that the deceased loved her whole family, which included her children and her husband and did not want anything bad to happen to her children or to her better half (i.e., her husband). In fact, there was something disturbing in the past of the deceased inasmuch as the deceased has written that though she intended to contribute to the growth of her children and rise of her husband, her emotional attachment to the past was denying to her such an opportunity. That, as a female child, the deceased had been tormented and made to suffer, at the hands of male members of her family, is clear from the fact that she had written, in Ext. J, that she, as a female child, still remembers the faces of the male members of the family. 25. In no uncertain words, the deceased has written, in her diary (Ext. J) that as far as she remembered, her parents never had a pleasant relation with each other until the time their children stopped staying with them and that her father was not financially sound. Thus, notwithstanding the denial by PW 1 and PW 2, that the deceased was mentally tormented, because of the fact that her parents did not have a cordial relation with each other and that her brothers. had very hostile relation with each other, the noting in the diary and her letters speak and reflect otherwise. 26. Exhibit K is a greetings card, whereby the deceased has written to her husband that she was missing him very much. She has also written in Ext. K that she could not resist meeting her husband. This letter (Ext. K) of the deceased is full of love for her husband and the deep attachment, which they had with each other. 27. She has also written in Ext. K that she could not resist meeting her husband. This letter (Ext. K) of the deceased is full of love for her husband and the deep attachment, which they had with each other. 27. By Exhibit L (13.02.87), the deceased has clearly written that throughout past two years, she has been receiving love and care from her husband and she was confident that his love would never fade away with passage of time. 28. By Exhibit M, the deceased has said that every moment, which she passed with her husband, has given her the feeling of caring, sharing, loving and owning a wonder world and that her husband had been the source of strength for her, whenever she felt weak. 29. By Exhibit 9, the deceased has said that her brother received promotion and that her husband proved to be lucky for the Tiwaries. 30. By Exhibit P, the deceased has expressed her feelings that her husband has special understanding of her and has been very helpful, whenever she needed him. In Ext. P, the deceased has further written that she felt highly honoured and pleased to be wife of the accused. 31. In Exhibit U, the deceased has clearly expressed that she considers herself extremely lucky to have the accused as her husband. In fact, the deceased loved her matrimonial house inasmuch as she has clearly written in Ext. U that when she steps into her husband's house, she feels so good that she cannot describe and she awaits her husbands arrival to make the house a happier place. 32. From the contents of the letters and also the greetings cards, which have been quoted above, there can be no dispute, and, in fact, it has not been disputed, that the deceased had great love and warmth for her husband. The letters aforementioned, which the deceased had written to her husband, and the greetings cards, which she had sent to her husband, on various occasions of importance of their life, give no clue at all that the accused-Appellant had been ill-treating the deceased. Par from this, these letters and the greetings cards reflect that the accused-Appellant too had love and care for his wife and children and that the deceased had greatly enjoyed the company of her husband and wanted to remain in his company. In fact, the letter, dated 01.01.1986 (Ext. Par from this, these letters and the greetings cards reflect that the accused-Appellant too had love and care for his wife and children and that the deceased had greatly enjoyed the company of her husband and wanted to remain in his company. In fact, the letter, dated 01.01.1986 (Ext. K), is a letter, which the deceased had written to her husband after the birth of their second child. In this letter, she had clearly mentioned that she had been missing the Appellant very much and yearning to visit her husband at Dehradoon. By this letter, dated 01.01.1986, the deceased made it clear that she never likes to leave her husband and she cannot stay without him. In this letter, dated 01.01.1986, the deceased had further written, "Thanks for everything you give". On the occasion of the second year of their marriage, on receiving a letter with a present, the deceased reacted by writing the letter, dated 13.02.1987 (Ext. L) and sending the greeting card, dated 13.02.1987, wherein she clearly stated that her husband's love and care are what she had been receiving during the past two years and knew that it would never fade with time; rather, the love and affection would increase with the passage of time. Ext. M is the card, which was sent by the deceased to her husband on the occasion of their second marriage anniversary, wherein she has written that every moment, which she had passed with her husband, had given to her a feeling of her husband being caring and loving. The deceased has also expressed, in her letter, that she feels a sense of security, when she is around her husband. Ext. N is a letter, dated 02.03.1987, written by the deceased to her husband, when her brother received promotion and, in this letter, the deceased, referring to her husband, wrote that her husband had proved to be lucky to Tiwaris (i.e., her parental family). In the greeting card, dated 15.03.1987 (Ext.8), the deceased, while sending her greetings on the occasion of holi, expressed her feelings that her holi would not be over until she puts colour on her husband. In Ext. B, which is the letter written on the occasion of yet Anr. anniversary, the deceased has clearly written that the love of her husband had always been fulfilling her position as wife and also mother. In Ext. B, which is the letter written on the occasion of yet Anr. anniversary, the deceased has clearly written that the love of her husband had always been fulfilling her position as wife and also mother. In this letter, she also states that her husband has been helping her every time she has been in need of him and that she is honoured and blessed to be his wife. 33. The contents of the letters and the greetings cards, as quoted above, give, as already mentioned above, the impression that the deceased and her husband shared not only extremely cordial relation, but the deceased used to feel indebted to her husband, because of the care, love and affection with which the deceased had been treated by her husband. Unless, therefore, it can be shown that the contents of the letters were designed by the deceased, suppressing her real feelings towards her husband, it is impossible to ignore the contents of these letters and greeting cards and readily hold, as has been contended by the prosecution, that the life of the deceased had been made miserable by her husband, because of the torture, both physical as well as mental, which she had been subjected to. 34. Apart from the fact that no explanation has been offered by the prosecution as to why the deceased had written such letters, which are full of love and warmth for her husband, the letters belie the oral testimony of the prosecution witnesses that the deceased had been treated with cruelty by her husband. In fact, no explanation is discernible, in this regard, from the materials on record. Unshaken, convincing and trust-worthy evidence is required, in a case of present nature, if the Court has to ignore the contents of the letters written by the deceased herself and place reliance on the oral testimony of the prosecution witnesses, which go contrary to, or belie the veracity of, the contents of such letters. Unshaken, convincing and trust-worthy evidence is required, in a case of present nature, if the Court has to ignore the contents of the letters written by the deceased herself and place reliance on the oral testimony of the prosecution witnesses, which go contrary to, or belie the veracity of, the contents of such letters. Unless, therefore, on dispassionate analysis of the evidence on record, the evidence, given by the parents, relatives and friends of the deceased, are found to be unimpeachable and inspire confidence of the Court, or unless there is credible evidence on record showing that the contents of the letters and/or greetings card, which have been referred to, contain deliberate lies, it would be too hazardous and immensely dangerous to place reliance on the oral testimony of the witnesses, who are, admittedly, interested witnesses inasmuch as they are relatives and friends of the deceased. 35. Bearing in mind what is indicated above, let me, now, turn to the evidence of the mother of the deceased, namely, Smt. Premlata Tiwari (PW1). According to the evidence of this witness, till the birth of the first child, the relation between the deceased and her husband was cordial and it was after the birth of the first child that their relation gradually deteriorated. PW1 has deposed that except her (PW1), no other person had the knowledge about the torture, which the deceased had been subjected to by the accused. PW1 also claims that she did not report about the torture, which the deceased had been undergoing, to anyone except her husband. In contrast to the evidence, so given by the mother of the deceased, the evidence of her father, namely, Rajinder Kr. Tiwari (PW2) and the allegations, made by him (PW2), in the First Information Report, are to the effect that since the commencement of their marital life, the accused had been ill-treating the deceased both physically as well as mentally. In the face of the evidence, which the mother of the deceased has given belying her husband's assertions made in the First Information Report and also in his evidence that the accused had been ill-treating the deceased since the day of their marital life, the assertions, so made in the First In formation Report and also in his evidence by the father of the deceased, cannot be implicitly relied upon. 36. 36. It may also be pointed out that PW2 claims that when he was posted at Ambala, the accused was posted at Rurki, they used to frequently go to the house of the accused and found that his behaviour towards Kiran had not changed and that they used to help Kiran by giving money, etc. PW2 has gone to the extent of saying that even after the birth of the son of the deceased, the behaviour of the accused towards Kiran did not change. Apart from the fact that PW1 does not support the evidence given by PW2 that whenever he (PW2) and his wife (PW1) visited the house of the accused, deceased complained of ill behaviour by her husband towards her and/or that they had helped the deceased by giving money, the evidence of PW1 is categorical that the marital life of the deceased and her husband was pleasant and that their relation deteriorated after the birth of the first child and, further, none, except her (PW1), knew about the ill behaviour of the accused towards the deceased and that it was she (PW1), who had reported to her husband about how the deceased had been suffering at the hands of her husband. 37. In short, thus, while the evidence of the mother of the deceased is to the effect that the relationship between the accused, on the one hand, and the deceased, on the other, had been cordial till the birth of their first child and that their relation started deteriorating after the birth of the first child, the evidence of the father of the deceased is that the accused had been torturing and ill-treating the deceased from the very commencement of their marital life and that even after the birth of the first child, the behaviour of the accused towards the deceased did not change. Though PW2 claims that whenever they happened to visit the deceased, they used to give her money, no such claim has been made by the mother of the deceased. In fact, the evidence of the mother of the deceased shows that except a sum of Rs. 25,000/-, which the accused had allegedly demanded, no demand for money was ever raised by the accused. Thus, with regard to the prosecution's case as to when the accused had started ill-treating the deceased, there is no consistent evidence. In fact, the evidence of the mother of the deceased shows that except a sum of Rs. 25,000/-, which the accused had allegedly demanded, no demand for money was ever raised by the accused. Thus, with regard to the prosecution's case as to when the accused had started ill-treating the deceased, there is no consistent evidence. In other words, with regard to the very foundation of the prosecution's case as to when the deceased had started being tortured - mentally and/or physically - by the accused, there is no consistent evidence on record. In fact, the evidence, adduced, in this regard, by the two prosecution witnesses aforementioned is mutually destructive of each other and does not, therefore, inspire confidence. 38. Though PW2 claims that the deceased was not given day to day expenses and whenever they visited her, they used to give her money, there is no such assertion in the evidence of PW 1 that her daughter was not being given day to day expenses by the accused and/or that whenever they visited the house of the deceased, they gave money to her. PW2 also claims that the deceased had to take a teaching job in order to maintain herself. There is nothing, in the evidence of PW1, to show that driven by economic necessity, arising out of the fact that her husband had not been giving her any money, the deceased had to take up the job of a teacher. 39. What is most significant to note, in the evidence of PW2, is that he claims that he used to be informed by Kiran about the ill-treatment, which she was being subjected to, the information having been given, sometimes, over phone and, sometimes, by letters addressed by the deceased to her mother. The prosecution has, however, produced not even one letter to show that Kiran had ever written to her mother that the accused was torturing her. Far from this, the letters, written by the deceased to her mother, reflect that the deceased had no complaint against her husband and the complaint, if any, which she had, is against the strained relation between her parents and amongst the members of her parental family. Far from this, the letters, written by the deceased to her mother, reflect that the deceased had no complaint against her husband and the complaint, if any, which she had, is against the strained relation between her parents and amongst the members of her parental family. Belying his own assertions, PW2 has, at one stage of his cross-examination, admitted that after going through the letters of the deceased, his wife (PW1) had never told him that the accused had been torturing the deceased. In fact, even PW1 has, at one stage of her cross-examination, admitted that the deceased never used to complain about the torture meted out to her. Thus, with every passing moment, it becomes more and more transparent that PW1 and PW2 have been making changes, twisting and turning their evidence, and the evidence, so given by them, are, eventually, seen to be belying each other. 40. It is also worth noticing, though already indicated above, that according to the evidence of PW1, except her, none else knew about the torture, which the deceased was being subjected to, and that she (PW1) was the one, who had informed her husband (PW2) about what had been happening to the deceased and how the deceased had been suffering at the hands of the accused. Surprisingly, however, PW2, nowhere, states that his wife (PW1) had ever reported to him that the accused had been torturing Kiran and/or that he was unaware of the fact that Kiran was being subjected to torture until the time his wife (PW1) reported to him that Kiran was being subjected to torture; rather, the evidence given by PW2 gives an impression as if he personally knew that Kiran was being harassed and tortured by the accused. However, his wife's evidence is that except her, nobody else knew about the fact that Kiran was being tortured by the accused and that it was she (PW1), who had reported the matter to her husband. It is, thus, clear that with regard to the torture and harassment of the deceased at the hands of the accused, neitherthe evidence of PW1 nor the evidence of PW2 can be relied upon. 41. It is also in the evidence of PW1 that the accused used to consume liquor and upon consuming liquor, he used to become furious and rebuke the deceased in filthy language. 41. It is also in the evidence of PW1 that the accused used to consume liquor and upon consuming liquor, he used to become furious and rebuke the deceased in filthy language. There is no corroboration of this piece of evidence from any other witness including PW2, father of the deceased, and/or PW11 (brother of the deceased). In fact, none of the prosecution witnesses, except PW1, has said anything, which could indicate that behaviour of the accused towards the parents of the deceased or towards her other relatives was bad, rude and/or insulting. PW2 claims that in the year 1990, the accused had demanded from Kiran a sum of Rs. 60,000/- for purchasing a Maruti car and, on coming to know about the same, when he (PW2) advised the accused to take a loan from the bank and offered to help the accused in obtaining the loan, the accused declined. This assertion of PW1 derives no support from the evidence of PW1 inasmuch as PW1, nowhere, claims that the accused had ever asked Kiran to bring Rs. 60,000/- from her parents so as to enable them to purchase a Maruti car. 42. Let me, now, turn to the evidence of PW11 (Major Nilesh Tiwari), brother of the deceased and other witnesses, whose evidence, according to the prosecution, show that the deceased used to be tortured by the accused. 43. While considering the evidence of Major Nilesh Tiwari (PW11), what needs to be noted is that at the time of Kiran's marriage in February, 1985, he was a student. PW11 claims that at the time of marriage, apart from colour television, refrigerator, gold, etc., a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was given in cash. It is interesting to note, in this regard, that the evidence of PW2 is that a cash amount of Rs. 1,600/- only was given to Kiran at the time of her marriage. Thus, from the very commencement of his evidence, PW11 belies the evidence given by his father and he (PW11) appears to be too keen to project, by hook or by crook, that they had given a huge amount of cash to the deceased at the time of her marriage with the accused. Thus, from the very commencement of his evidence, PW11 belies the evidence given by his father and he (PW11) appears to be too keen to project, by hook or by crook, that they had given a huge amount of cash to the deceased at the time of her marriage with the accused. In fact, when one goes through the contents of the diary (Exhibit J), which the deceased used to maintain, it becomes clear that the financial condition of the parents of the deceased was not very sound inasmuch as the deceased had, in this diary, admittedly, written that her father did not have very sound financial background. 44. PW11 claims that as early as in the year 1986, when he visited Kiran, Kiran told him that she was not happy with the accused as he had been demanding money. When the evidence so given by PW11 is considered in the light of the evidence given by his mother (PW1), it becomes clear that the assertions made by PW11 that Kiran had told him that she was not happy with the accused as he had been demanding money cannot be correct inasmuch as his mother's categorical assertion is that until birth of their first child, Kiran and her husband had maintained cordial relation. This apart, Kiran's mother's evidence gives no indication whatsoever that Kiran was not being given adequate money for her maintenance by the accused. Furthermore, even the documentary evidence, which exist in the form of letters written by the deceased and the entries in her diary, belie the assertions of PW11. It can also not be ignored that PW11 claims that he had been secretly paying money to the deceased; but this assertion too is not supported by PW1 inasmuch as she, nowhere, deposes that the deceased was not being given adequate amount of money by the accused. Even the previous statement of PW11, made to the CBI, does not corroborate the accusation of PW11 inasmuch as he had not stated before the CBI that Kiran's husband had not been paying any money to her and/or her children. 45. PW11 claims that he was a witness to assault on Kiran by the accused and that he had reported to his parents about the assault on Kiran by the accused. 45. PW11 claims that he was a witness to assault on Kiran by the accused and that he had reported to his parents about the assault on Kiran by the accused. What is, however, curious to note is that PW11's parents do not support these assertions of PW11; rather, PW1 (mother of PW11) belies such evidence given by her son inasmuch as her categorical assertion is that except her, none else knew about the torture, which Kiran had been subjected to, and that she had only reported to her husband about the torture, which the deceased was being subjected to. 46. Coupled with the above, one can also note that PW11 had, admittedly, not stated before the CBI that he had been giving money to Kiran without informing his parents. Though PW11 claims that Kiran had been slapped by the accused in his presence, no such statement was made by this witness before the CBI. PW11 states that Kiran had written to him a letter regarding the ill-treatment and torture, which she was being subjected to. The letter, so spoken of by PW11, has not been produced in the evidence and no explanation for not producing the letter has been offered by the prosecution nor is any explanation discernible, in this regard, from the evidence on record. 47. I, now, come to the evidence of PW 14 (Usha Vajpayee), who is the aunt of the deceased, she being wife of PW 15 (DK Vajpayee). According to her evidence, in the year 1988, when the accused was posted at Jabalpur, the accused and Kiran used to visit them and during one of such visits, the accused had slapped Kiran in her presence. PW 14 further claims that when she made further inquiry from Kiran, Kiran told her that she had been tortured and assaulted by accused for petty matters and, on further query made, Kiran reported to her that she was assaulted, because the accused had demanded money from her parents for purchase of Television, Car, etc. 48. I have already pointed out above that the evidence given by PW2 that the accused had demanded money for purchase of car has not been supported by PW1. This apart, neither PW1 nor PW2 has claimed that the accused had ever demanded TV (i.e., Television). 48. I have already pointed out above that the evidence given by PW2 that the accused had demanded money for purchase of car has not been supported by PW1. This apart, neither PW1 nor PW2 has claimed that the accused had ever demanded TV (i.e., Television). Far from this, the evidence of PW1 is that a colour TV was given to Kiran on the occasion of her marriage. Thus, the omnibus statement made by PW 14 cannot be readily believed. 49. That the evidence of prosecution witnesses is well rehearsed becomes clear from the fact that PW 14 admits, in her cross-examination, that she came to Guwahati with her husband (PW15), they stayed in a hotel with Nilesh (PW11), brother of the deceased, and at the hotel, she and her husband had discussed about the evidence to be given in the Court and her husband told her to tell the Court about the assaults on Kiran by the accused. In her cross-examination, PW14 further admits that they talked about the evidence to be given in the Court and that in the discussion, which was so held, PW11 had taken part. Though PW14 states that PW11 told him to say what she knew about the case and the incident, the fact of the matter remains that PW14 admits that they discussed, as regards the evidence to be given, in the Court, for about 30 to 40 minutes. PW14 appears to have been caught in the cobweb of lies, when she claims that she reported about the assaults on Kiran, at the hands of the accused, to her husband (PW15) and her sister-in-law, (i.e. the mother of the deceased), namely, Premlata Tiwari (PW1); whereas the categorical assertion of PW1 is that except her, none else knew about the cruelty, which Kiran had been subjected to. Even PW2 has, nowhere, deposed that anyone, other than Kiran's parents, knew about the cruelty to which Kiran was being subjected. No credence can, therefore, be given to the claim of PW 14 that PW2 had told her that if the accused assaults Kiran, she (PW14) should report the matter to the police. This apart, even PW14's husband (PW15) does not corroborate the evidence of PW14 that at their house, the accused had slapped Kiran, though PW14 claims to have reported to her husband (PW15) about the assault on Kiran by the accused. 50. This apart, even PW14's husband (PW15) does not corroborate the evidence of PW14 that at their house, the accused had slapped Kiran, though PW14 claims to have reported to her husband (PW15) about the assault on Kiran by the accused. 50. I may also pause here to point out that though PW1 claims that the accused, sometimes, used to beat, in her presence, Kiran, this assertion of PW1 receives no corroboration from the evidence of her husband (PW2). It would, therefore, be unrealistic to believe the solitary version of PW1 that the accused used to beat Kiran in the presence of her mother. 51. Let me, now, advert to the evidence of PW12, who is known to the parents of the deceased. According to PW12, she (PW12) joined, in the year 1983, as a lecturer in RG College, Meerut, and she claims that Kiran was her student in the year 1987. This is palpably false inasmuch as Kiran got married, admittedly, on 14.02.1985 and she was having a baby and had been residing with her husband and her baby, at Dehradun, in the year 1987. PW12 claims that she used to visit the house of the deceased and even the deceased used to visit her house and during their conversation, she heard that the deceased was not happy with her married life. 52. Apart from the fact that the evidence on record makes it impossible to believe that PW12 had known Kiran in the year 1987, the letters, which Kiran had written, and which I have already discussed above, give no indication of Kiran's having been subjected to torture by the accused. It is, therefore, very difficult to believe that Kiran had told PW12 that she was not happy with her married life, when the letters, written by her, give absolutely no such indication at all. 53. Let me, now, examine as to how far the prosecution had succeeded in proving that the accused had, as alleged, raised a demand for a sum of Rs. 25,000/-. 54. Coming to the demand allegedly raised by the accused for a sum of Rs. 25,000/-, it is noteworthy that PW1 has deposed that at the instructions of the accused, the mother of the accused had written a letter to her (PW1) demanding Rs. 25,000/-. 54. Coming to the demand allegedly raised by the accused for a sum of Rs. 25,000/-, it is noteworthy that PW1 has deposed that at the instructions of the accused, the mother of the accused had written a letter to her (PW1) demanding Rs. 25,000/- and she (PW1) accordingly reported the matter to her husband (PW2), whereupon her husband (PW2) issued a cheque for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- in favour of the accused. It is in the evidence of PW1 that she went to Meerut with the cheque and when she handed over the cheque to the accused, the accused became angry, because the cheque had been issued in favour of the accused; whereas the accused wanted cash. 55. Even PW2 has claimed that Kiran had written a letter to her mother asking her to send, immediately, Rs. 25,000/- to Meerut and that Arvind's mother (i.e., the mother of the accused) too had written a letter to PW1 asking her (PW1) to carry Rs. 25,000/- to Meerut. PW2 also claims that he (PW2) sent, through his wife (PW1), a cheque for Rs. 25,000/- in the name of the accused, namely, Arvind Joshi, but when his wife (PW1) handed over the said cheque to the accused, the accused threatened her by saying that he wanted cash and not cheque. 56. Be that as it may, it is through Ext. E, dated 15.02.1992, and Ext. I, dated 06.03.1992, that the alleged demands for money were, according to the prosecution, made. These two letters are quoted herein-below: Ext E 15th Feb, 92. Suratgarh My dear Maa With regards I got your card but did not get any letter from you. Prior to this, I wrote a postcard to you hurriedly. Perhaps you must have not got it. Maa Bunny's exam will be over from 24 to 27th Feb. Mummy (Arvind's mother) and Bunny will go to Meerut by 1st March. On 5th March truck will proceed to Meerut from here. He (Arvind) has got your sofa set prepare. Two switch boards have also been prepared. I got letter from Joya. Neelu may come in March here for field firing. This is what Joya had written to me. But we may go before that from here. We will start from Suratgarh on 6th March and on 7th we will reach Delhi. From Delhi I will ring up to you. Two switch boards have also been prepared. I got letter from Joya. Neelu may come in March here for field firing. This is what Joya had written to me. But we may go before that from here. We will start from Suratgarh on 6th March and on 7th we will reach Delhi. From Delhi I will ring up to you. On 16th March the truck will start from Meerut to Tezpur. We have got reservation for 28th March from Tinsukia. We will reach Delhi on 19'h and on 20th we will board the train. Maa I may not be able to come because of tight schedule. You and daddy come and meet me in Meerut. Rest will tell you on phone after reaching Delhi on 11th March he (Arvind) will reach Meerut. Only I have to get unloaded the luggage from the truck and further to arrange Anr. truck at Meerut. It may be possible that he (Arvind) may come to Meerut, a day before holi. Rai will come along with truck. Till Meerut, Das will accompany the truck. OK Maa. when you come, bring Rs. 25,000/- out of that money. Here we have to pay the installment of the plot. Maa get some ghee. Nothing else. Rest everything is fine. My packing is almost over. Few kitchen utensils are left. OK Mummy, Maa I stop it here otherwise letter will not get posted in time. From all of us you and Daddy accept our regards and lots of love. From Mummy's side Namastey. Your daughter Nanu (Emphasis is supplied) Ext I 6th March Meerut Cantt. Dear sister Lata Shuv Ashirbad I have come back from kids. I tried so many times to make telephone call to you but again and again exchange people tell - number is not correct. I was told the number as 29902. Today again the telephone could not be through to you. Hence, I am writing this letter to you. Luggage truck has arrived on 4th Kids will reach Meerut on 12th Morning. Dear daughter Kiran is not having much time to come to you. You come and meet her. Too far away posting has come. Dear Arvind had told that bring Rs. 25,000/- draft while coming in Arvind's name. Dear Bunny has come along with me. Rest is fine. How is the health of both of you? Dear daughter Kiran is not having much time to come to you. You come and meet her. Too far away posting has come. Dear Arvind had told that bring Rs. 25,000/- draft while coming in Arvind's name. Dear Bunny has come along with me. Rest is fine. How is the health of both of you? You must be getting latter from the children. Let me know about their well being. My blessings to both of you and lots of love to the children. Your sister Kusum Joshi (Emphasis is supplied) 57. From a careful reading of Ext. I, which was admittedly written on 06.03.1992, by the mother of the accused to the mother of the deceased, what transpires is that since the accused had been transferred to a long distance, the accused and the deceased did not have enough time to visit Kiran's parents and, therefore, Kiran's mother was requested to come to Meerut. In Ext. 1, the mother of the accused also stated that Arvind (i.e., the accused) had told that while coming to Meerut, Kiran's mother should bring Rs. 25,000/-, in draft, in Arvind's name. There is absolutely nothing in Ext. I to show that the accused had demanded that the amount of Rs. 25,000/- be given to him in cash. Far from this, Ext. I, which the prosecution heavily relies upon, shows that the accused had asked Rs. 25,000/- to be brought by way of draft, and that too, in the name of the accused. In the face of such a letter, no credence can be given to the evidence of PW1 (which even PW2 seeks to corroborate) that the accused was angry, because the demanded amount of Rs. 25,000/- had not been given to the accused in cash and that it was a cheque of the said amount, which had been issued in favour of the accused. 58. It is also worth noticing that the said plot of land was, admittedly, purchased in the name of Kiran for a total consideration value of Rs. 60,000/- and out of the sum of Rs. 60,000/-, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was, admittedly, paid by the accused. Thus, the transaction of loan of Rs. 10,000/-, even if true, does not, as already indicated hereinbefore, necessarily imply that the accused had put pressure on Kiran to obtain the said sum of Rs. 10,000/- from her father. 60,000/- and out of the sum of Rs. 60,000/-, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was, admittedly, paid by the accused. Thus, the transaction of loan of Rs. 10,000/-, even if true, does not, as already indicated hereinbefore, necessarily imply that the accused had put pressure on Kiran to obtain the said sum of Rs. 10,000/- from her father. In fact, the evidence given by PW15 shows that PW2 had demanded the repayment of the said sum of Rs. 10,000/- within 15/20 days. 59. In the circumstances as indicated above, there is considerable force in the submissions, made on behalf of the accused-Appellant, that the parents of the deceased have tried to show that the accused did not want to maintain any record of the money allegedly demanded by him and it was for this reason that he wanted Rs. 25,000/- to be paid to him in cash, but as the father of the deceased had sent a cheque in the name of the accused and not cash, the accused had become furious; whereas Ext. 1, written by the mother of the accused to the mother of the deceased shows otherwise and clearly demonstrate that the accused had asked that the said amount of Rs. 25,000/- be brought to Meerut, by way of draft, in the name of the accused. 60. Thus, while PW1 and PW2 have tried to show that the accused demanded Rs. 25,000/- in cash and when the said demanded amount of Rs. 25,000/- was given, in the form of a cheque, in the name of the accused, the accused had become furious, the contents of Ext. 1 show that since the accused had himself asked that the said amount of Rs. 25,000/- be brought to Meerut in the form of draft in the name of the accused, there was no question of the accused becoming furious on receiving cheque. Had the evidence of PW1 and/or PW2 been to the effect that the accused had felt angry, because he had asked the money to be brought by way of demand draft, but the money was brought to Meerut by way of cheque, the matter would have, perhaps, been a little different. 61. Let me, now, turn to Ext. E, which was the letter, in question, written by Kiran, on 15.02.1992, to her mother. In this letter, Kiran has written, "Ok Maa, when you come, bring Rs. 61. Let me, now, turn to Ext. E, which was the letter, in question, written by Kiran, on 15.02.1992, to her mother. In this letter, Kiran has written, "Ok Maa, when you come, bring Rs. 25 thousand out of that money. Here, we have to pay the installment of the plot." The words, so used, in the letter aforementioned, clearly show that the amount of Rs. 25,000/-, which Kiran had asked her mother to bring to Meerut, was for payment of installment of land, which Kiran and her husband were to purchase. The question, now, is as to what was the source from which Kiran had asked the said sum of Rs. 25,000/- to be brought. In this regard, it is extremely important to note that Kiran has written to her mother to bring Rs. 25,000/- "out of that money". The question, therefore, is as to what Kiran had meant by the expression "out of that money". 62. Before proceeding further, it can be readily pointed out that Kiran was asking her mother to bring Rs. 25,000/- from a specific account. The question, therefore, is as to what is that account. 63. My quest for an answer to the question, posed above, brings me to the evidence of Kiran's father (PW2) and his brother-in-law, DK Vajpayee (PW15). The evidence of PW15 shows that in the year 1988, when he was serving at Jabalpur, the accused and Kiran were also residing there and that they used to visit the house of PW15. The evidence of PW2 also shows that PW15 was associated with a housing society at Jabalpur. The evidence of PW 15 further shows that during their stay at Jabalpur, the accused told PW15 that he (the accused) wanted to purchase a plot of land at Jabalpur and sought for monetary help and though PW15 offered to pay to the accused Rs. 10,000/-, the accused declined to accept the same. What is also necessary to note is that PW15 has further deposed that after a few days, he (PW15) received a phone call from PW2 saying that he was, on the request of Kiran, sending Rs. 10,000/- for purchase of land. 64. Close on the heels of the above evidence of PW15, his brother-in-law, (i.e., PW2, who is the father of the deceased), has claimed that the accused had asked him to give Rs. 10,000/- for purchase of land. 64. Close on the heels of the above evidence of PW15, his brother-in-law, (i.e., PW2, who is the father of the deceased), has claimed that the accused had asked him to give Rs. 10,000/- to D.K. Vajpayee (PW15), who is husband of the sister of PW2, and he (PW2) accordingly sent two bank drafts of Rs. 5,000/- each to PW15 for purchasing a plot of land, at Jabalpur, which the accused wanted to purchase. Grilled in the cross-examination on this aspect of her evidence, PW1 (Kiran's mother), however, admits that there was a bank account at the Central Bank of India, Gwalior, in the name of Kiran. PW1 also admits that the cheque of Rs. 25,000/- was taken out from Kiran's account. She further admits that she was not aware of the source through which the said sum of Rs. 25,000/- had been credited to Kiran's account in the bank. In fact, she (PW1) expresses her ignorance by saying that she cannot say who had credited the said amount in the account of Kiran. She further expresses her ignorance by deposing that she does not know whether Kiran had deposited the said amount after selling her land. All these admissions of PW1 clearly show that PW1 does not deny that it is out of the amount, belonging to Kiran and her husband, that the said sum of Rs. 25,000/- were to be brought to Meerut. 65. It is, now, imperative to note that from a combined reading of the evidence of PW15 and PW2, what transpires is that since PW15 was a member of a housing society, at Jabalpur, the accused wanted to purchase a plot of land in the said society and obtained Rs. 10,000/- from his father-in-law, (i.e., PW2), PW15 helped the accused and Kiran to purchase the land. Ext. X is the relevant sale deed and the evidence on record, admittedly, reflects that a plot of land was purchased, in the name of Kiran, for a total consideration value of Rs. 60,000/- and out of the said sum of Rs. 60,000/-, a sum of as much as Rs. 50,000/- was, admittedly, paid by the accused. 66. Ext. X is the relevant sale deed and the evidence on record, admittedly, reflects that a plot of land was purchased, in the name of Kiran, for a total consideration value of Rs. 60,000/- and out of the said sum of Rs. 60,000/-, a sum of as much as Rs. 50,000/- was, admittedly, paid by the accused. 66. In the backdrop of the above facts, when I proceed further with the evidence of PW15, what attracts the eyes, most prominently, is that PW15 has deposed that after 15/20 days from the date of receipt of the said sum of Rs. 10,000/-, he (PW15) received a phone call from PW2 requesting him to send back Rs. 10,000/-. This shows that even if a sum of Rs. 10,000/- had been given to the accused by PW2 for purchase of land at Jabalpur, the said sum was in the form of loan and it was for this reason that within 15/20 days, Kiran's father (PW2) asked for repayment of Rs. 10,000/-. From the evidence, so given, it cannot be, as a corollary, inferred that the accused had put pressure on Kiran to request her father to obtain the said sum of Rs. 10,000/- permanently as has been sought to be projected by the prosecution witnesses. Moreover, there is absolutely no evidence on record to show that the said sum of Rs. 10,000/- was not repaid by the accused and/or that PW2 had to demand repayment of Rs. 10,000/- at any subsequent stage and/or that the accused had refused to repay the said sum of Rs. 10,000/-. 67. I may pause here to point out that as far as the accused-Appellant is concerned, he has denied that he had ever obtained Rs. 10,000/- from his father-in-law to purchase the said plot of land, whose total value was Rs. 60,000/-. In the face of such denial, it was for the prosecution to prove that the said sum of Rs. 10,000/- was obtained or demanded by the accused not as a loan, but as a demand for money and was never refund. In this regard, however, the prosecution has failed to show that Rs. 10,000/- had not been taken as a loan inasmuch the clear evidence of PW15 is that within 15/20 days from the date of receiving Rs. 10,000/- from PW2, he received a phone call from PW2 requesting him to send back Rs. 10,000/-. In this regard, however, the prosecution has failed to show that Rs. 10,000/- had not been taken as a loan inasmuch the clear evidence of PW15 is that within 15/20 days from the date of receiving Rs. 10,000/- from PW2, he received a phone call from PW2 requesting him to send back Rs. 10,000/-. This, in turn, shows, it may bear repetition, that even if the sum of Rs. 10,000/- had been given to the accused by PW2 for purchase of land at Jabalpur, the said sum was in the form of loan and not in response to any demand for money as sought to be contended by the prosecution. 68. It is also necessary to point out that even PW15, as the evidence on record discloses, has not been truthful to the Court. According to the evidence given by PW15, the said plot of land, which had been purchased in the name of Kiran, was sold for Rs. 60,000/-. What is, however, extremely important to note, in this regard, is that while PW15 claims that the land was sold for Rs. 60,000/-, the evidence given by PW2 is that the said plot of land was sold for Rs. 90,000/-, a sum of Rs. 60,000/- being in cheque and the remaining amount of Rs. 30,000/- being in cash. This part of the evidence of PW2 has not been disputed by the defence. It is also in the evidence of PW2 that the cheque, which was for a sum of Rs. 60,000/-, was deposited in Kiran's SB Account and the cash amount of Rs. 30,000/- was taken away by the accused. In his cross-examination, PW2 has, however, admitted that a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was deposited, on 21.10.91, in cash in Kiran's account and that the said sum of Rs. 60,000/-, paid by cheque, was deposited in Kiran's account on 22.10.1991. 69. It is, thus, clear that not only the cheque amount of Rs. 60,000/-, but even out of the cash amount of Rs. 30,000/-, as much as Rs. 10,000/- stood deposited in Kiran's account. This, in turn, shows that the assertions made by PW2 that the whole cash amount of Rs. 30,000/- had been taken away by the accused, is incorrect. Belying, however, the evidence of PW2 that the said land, located at Jabalpur, was sold for Rs. 90,000/-, PW15 claims that the land was sold for Rs. 60,000/-. This, in turn, shows that the assertions made by PW2 that the whole cash amount of Rs. 30,000/- had been taken away by the accused, is incorrect. Belying, however, the evidence of PW2 that the said land, located at Jabalpur, was sold for Rs. 90,000/-, PW15 claims that the land was sold for Rs. 60,000/-. Thus, it is clear that the prosecution witnesses have not been telling the truth and it is for this reason that on every aspect of its case, the prosecution has adduced inconsistent and irreconcilable evidence. 70. Keeping in view what have been pointed out above, let me, now, turn to Ext. V, which was, admittedly, written on 17.02.91 and sent by PW15 from Jabalpur to the accused and his wife, Kiran. This letter shows that accused and his wife had decided to sell their said plot of land at Jabalpur and even PW15 had concurred with their view that the land should be sold as it would be facing its optimum value of Rs. 89,000/- to 90,000/-. This sale of the land, according to the evidence on record, was for the purpose of enabling the accused and Kiran to purchase a plot of land at Meerut and it was for this reason that Kiran and accused had asked PW1, mother of Kiran, to bring Rs. 25,000/- to Meerut. Though I would revert shortly to the source from which the said sum of Rs. 25,000/- were to be brought, what is important to note is that the letter (Ext. V) reads as under: Dear Arvind & Kiran With love & regards 'Happy New Year' I wish happy & prosperous year to all of you including son Bunni & Mini Banni. We also congratulate you for having allotment of house near Meerut.Accordingly as per message from Kiran's Daddy, we decided to sell your plot No. F-19 in our coop. society. I had discussion with Kiran's mummy & dady on phone and finally come to conclusion to dispose off the plot. Otherwise also in my opinion it is better to sell it now without investing any amount for Boundary wall etc. whatever you have invested, you know. I want to sell it for Rs. 90.000/- (approx). At present people are ready to pay around 85000/- to 87000/- but I would sell it around 89000/- to 90000/- & the registration extra which will be borne by purchaser. whatever you have invested, you know. I want to sell it for Rs. 90.000/- (approx). At present people are ready to pay around 85000/- to 87000/- but I would sell it around 89000/- to 90000/- & the registration extra which will be borne by purchaser. It will be finalized within a weeks time. In the meantime you are requested to send the original registration deed with original money receipt (photo copies to be kept with you so that I can submit the same to society & plot can be sold out through society without the presence of Smt. Kiran Joshi but an undertaking is required to be send as under: To President, S.G.N.S.S. Maryolit, JBP I am ready to surrender my plot No. F-19 at Sainik Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti, Maryooit JBP to the society subject to the condition that it is sold out by Society to any body and proper value after sell is given to the undersigned. Kindly send the amount to the undersigned by DD. Yours faithfully, (Smt. Kiran Joshi) Encls: Original MR's & Registration Deed. (Emphasis is supplied) 71. PW 15 admits that he is the author of Exts. V. This letter clearly shows that even PW15 had suggested to the accused and his wife, Kiran, that the said plot of land should be sold without investing any further money and that the sale price would be around Rs. 89,000/- to 90,000/- and that the sale can be finalized within a week's time. In fact, PW15 had also sent to the accused and his wife a copy of the letter, which was required to be sent by Kiran to the housing society so as to transfer the plot of land, in question, to the new purchaser. 72. From the evidence discussed above, what becomes more than abundantly clear is that the land, in question, was sold by Kiran for a total sum of Rs. 90,000/-. Out of this amount of Rs. 90,000/-, Rs. 60,000/- was paid by way of cheque and Rs. 30,000/- was paid in cash. The cheque was deposited in Kiran's account on 22.10.1991 and the cash amount of Rs. 10,000/- was deposited, in the said account, on 21.10.1991. In view of the fact that PW15 has deliberately falsified his evidence by claiming that the land was sold of Rs. 60,000/- was paid by way of cheque and Rs. 30,000/- was paid in cash. The cheque was deposited in Kiran's account on 22.10.1991 and the cash amount of Rs. 10,000/- was deposited, in the said account, on 21.10.1991. In view of the fact that PW15 has deliberately falsified his evidence by claiming that the land was sold of Rs. 60,000/-, it becomes evident that his testimony cannot be taken on its face value and needs to be properly probed to test its veracity. 73. Bearing in mind what is indicated above, let me, now, revert to the allegation of the prosecution that the accused had demanded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- by a letter, which he got written by Kiran to her mother (PW1), and by way of Anr. letter, which he got written by his mother to Kiran's mother. As regards the letter written by the mother of the accused to the mother of the deceased, I have already pointed out that the evidence given by PW1 and PW2 cannot be believed that the accused had become furious, when a cheque of Rs. 25,000/- was handed over to him by PW1, at Meerut, instead of Rs. 25,000/- in cash. 74. It is also clear from the evidence discussed above that the said amount of Rs. 25,000/- were to be taken out from Kiran's account, where the money stood deposited by the accused and the deceased after sale of their land at Jabalpur and that the said money was required for payment of the installment of the land, which Kiran and her husband were to purchase at Meerut. 75. It is also necessary to point out that PW1 has, nowhere, deposed that she ever reported to her husband (PW2) as regards the fact that the accused had refused to accept the cheque and/or wanted cash and/or that the accused had become furious, when he came to learn that the said sum of Rs. 25,000/- was not being paid to him in cash. Thus, PW2 had no personal knowledge as to what had transpired between his wife (PW1) and the accused at Meerut. Legalistically speaking, therefore, it is clear that the evidence, given by PW2, that the accused had become furious on receiving the cheque is nothing but hearsay. 25,000/- was not being paid to him in cash. Thus, PW2 had no personal knowledge as to what had transpired between his wife (PW1) and the accused at Meerut. Legalistically speaking, therefore, it is clear that the evidence, given by PW2, that the accused had become furious on receiving the cheque is nothing but hearsay. The impression that PW2 was not the type of person, who would readily give money gets re-inforced when I notice that within a few days of his paying Rs. 10,000/- to D.K. Vajpayee (PW15) to purchase land at Jabalpur, he (PW2) demanded repayment of the said sum of Rs. 10,000/-. Similarly, as regards Rs. 25,000/-, which is the amount in controversy, the statement made by PW2 to the police is very interesting inasmuch as he stated before police thus, That in March 1997, when we (accused) left for Tezpur he asked me for Rs. 25,000/- through Kiran from me. Even his mother wrote letter to my wife asking Rs. 25,000/-. I offered to send Rs. 25.000/- through Crossed cheque. SBI. Meerut Cantt. Where I still maintain all accounts subject to Kiran giving me a withdrawal form for Rs. 25.000/- in my favour of SBI. Gwalior from her account. (Emphasis is supplied) 76. It is very clear from the said previous statement of PW2 that PW2 had offered to send Rs. 25,000/- to the accused and the deceased provided that Kiran gives a signed withdrawal form for Rs. 25,000/- in his favour from her account. In such circumstances, it cannot be believed that PW2 had offered to pay Rs. 25,000/- simply because the accused had demanded the money. Far from this, the evidence on record speaks loud and clear that Kiran had clarified that the sum of Rs. 25,000/- be brought "out of that money" meaning thereby it is out of the money, which belonged to Kiran and her husband, that the sum of Rs. 25,000/- were to be brought to Meerut and not out of the earnings of PW1 and/or PW2. 77. Thus, what emerges from the evidence on record is that the accused was allotted a plot of land, at Meerut, by the Meerut Development Authority. This fact is not in dispute. This apart, in the light of the evidence on record discussed above, it becomes abundantly clear that Rs. 77. Thus, what emerges from the evidence on record is that the accused was allotted a plot of land, at Meerut, by the Meerut Development Authority. This fact is not in dispute. This apart, in the light of the evidence on record discussed above, it becomes abundantly clear that Rs. 25,000/- aforementioned, which the accused had allegedly demanded, belonged to the accused and his wife, Kiran, and this amount was needed for the purpose of paying installments of the land at Meerut. By her letter, dated 25.07.91 (Ext. I), written from Suratgarh to her mother, the deceased requested her mother to ask PW15 to send money soon, about Rs. 50,000/- to 60,000/-, being in white, in her name (i.e., in the name of the deceased) and the remaining amount, through draft, in the name of Arvind's mother. In fact, in her letter (Ext.I), the deceased requested her mother to ask PW15 to send money immediately, because the money was required to be deposited in the month of September; otherwise, the allotment would be cancelled. The letter makes it more than amply clear that the money was urgently required by the deceased and her husband for the purpose of making payment of installment of the land, which they had been allotted, at Meerut, by the Meerut Development Authority. There is absolutely no indication from this letter (Ext.I) that the parents of the deceased were to give the money form their earnings; rather, the deceased had asked that the money, belonging to the family of the deceased, (which had been realized from the sale of their land, at Jabalpur), be brought to Meerut. As the land, at Jabalpur, was in the name of the deceased, an amount of Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 60,000/- were requested to be sent in white, i.e., in the name of the deceased, and the remaining amount, in the form of draft, in the name of the mother of the accused. When the said amount of Rs. 25,000/- was asked to be brought to Meerut by way of a bank draft, which is a bank instrument, no reason has been assigned by PW2 for sending a cheque for the said sum of Rs. 25,000/-. I have also pointed out that in her letter (Exhibit E), the deceased had clearly asked her mother to bring Rs. 25,000/- was asked to be brought to Meerut by way of a bank draft, which is a bank instrument, no reason has been assigned by PW2 for sending a cheque for the said sum of Rs. 25,000/-. I have also pointed out that in her letter (Exhibit E), the deceased had clearly asked her mother to bring Rs. 25,000/- from the money, which belonged to the deceased and her husband; but her father did not send the money to the deceased. What really transpires from the evidence on record is that since Kiran did not send the signed withdrawal form, as had been demanded by her father, a mere cheque for Rs. 25,000/- was handed over to the accused, which allegedly made the accused furious. 78. From the evidence discussed above, it also becomes clear that the request made to the mother of the deceased by the mother of the accused as well as by the deceased herself to bring Rs. 25,000/- to Meerut was not a demand for money inasmuch as the money, which was requested to be brought to Meerut, belong to the deceased and her husband and the deceased too was very keen to get the money. The money, so requested to be brought to Meerut, was to be brought out of the money, which belonged to the deceased and her husband. Thus, the request for the said sum of Rs. 25,000/- did not constitute any demand for money. PW1 did not, however, carry any money to Meerut and the request of the deceased was, thus, not acceded to. As far as giving of cheque is concerned, there is inherently contradictory evidence inasmuch as PW1 claims that the cheque was given from the account of the deceased; whereas PW2 claims that the cheque was given from his own account. In such circumstances, there is great substance in the submission made on behalf of the accused-Appellant, that the cheques, in question, were subsequently prepared in order to show that the money, which the deceased or her mother-in-law had written about, were to be brought from the earnings of the parents of the deceased. 79. Let me, now, turn to the accusation made against the accused that he had sustained fracture on his foot, while he was trying to kick the deceased. 79. Let me, now, turn to the accusation made against the accused that he had sustained fracture on his foot, while he was trying to kick the deceased. It may be noted that on this aspect of the prosecution's case, the prosecution has examined PW1, PW2, PW11 and PW13. 80. According to the evidence of PW1, while the accused was posted at Dehradoon, he, along with Kiran, came to the house of PW1 and at that time, she noticed some minor fracture on the right let of the accused. PW1 claims that when she asked the accused as to how he had sustained the injury, the accused said that while he was starting the scooter, he sustained the injury, but at that point of time, Kiran protested by saying that the accused had actually kicked her. 81. Even PW2 has claimed that he too had noticed the accused slightly limping by one foot and when the reason was asked, the accused replied by saying that he had sustained the injury, while starting the scooter, but Kiran intervened and said that her husband was telling lies and clarified that her husband had kicked her, but his kick fell on a sofa and her husband sustained injury. 82. PW13 has also been examined to support the allegation that the accused had kicked the deceased in the manner as mentioned above. PW13, who is, admittedly, a very close friend of PW11, brother of the deceased, has deposed that after Kiran's marriage, one day, when he visited her parental house and was talking to Neelesh (PW11), he overheard Kiran saying that accused had once tried to kick her. PW13 also claims that when he asked about what he had overheard, PW11 told him that Kiran was being tortured for a long time by her husband. I may hasten to point out that PW11 has, nowhere, deposed that he had told PW13 that Kiran was being subjected to torture by her husband. 83. Thus, the evidence given by PW13 as to what PW11 had informed him as regards the torture to which the deceased had been subjected is nothing, but hearsay. This apart, it is the categorical assertion of PW11, on oath, at the trial, that he did not report to anyone except his parents about the torture, which Kiran had been subjected to by her husband. This apart, it is the categorical assertion of PW11, on oath, at the trial, that he did not report to anyone except his parents about the torture, which Kiran had been subjected to by her husband. Thus, the evidence given by PW13 as to what he had overheard and what he had been told by PW11 can be given no credence at all. In fact, it is quite interesting to note that PW11 has, nowhere, deposed that the accused had sustained fracture on his foot and/or had tried to kick Kiran; whereas the evidence of PW13, in his cross-examination, is that he had overheard the accused having kicked Kiran, when Kiran was reporting the matter to PW11. 84. Turning to the accusations made against the accused by prosecution witnesses that the accused had kicked the deceased, but the kick fell on a sofa and the deceased sustained fracture on his foot, it is noteworthy that the case of the defence, in this regard, is that on 12.11.2006, when the accused was returning back from market at night, his scooter skidded on pebbles lying on the road, he fell down and sustained injury on his right foot. On the next morning, i.e., 13.11.1986, deceased rang up Pradeep Tandon (DW2) and told his wife, Ms. Minaxi Tandon (DW3), to send her husband (DW2) to the residence of the accused so as to take him to hospital. DW2, according to the evidence on record, took the accused to Military Hospital, where x-ray was taken, hairline fracture was discovered and the foot of the accused was plastered. The treatment slips of the Military Hospital have been proved as Exhibit O. In support of his case, the accused has examined both witnesses, namely, DW2 and DW3 and has also proved, on record, treatment slips aforementioned. 85. It is, now, important to note that according to the evidence of DW2, he is from Meerut and known to the accused for the last thirty years and he also knew the deceased inasmuch as he was present at the time of engagement and also on the occasion of marriage. It is in the evidence of DW2 that he has, amongst Ors., a business, which is run in the name of Tandon Tent House, which deals with flower decoration, construction of pendal, lighting, catering work, etc. It is in the evidence of DW2 that he has, amongst Ors., a business, which is run in the name of Tandon Tent House, which deals with flower decoration, construction of pendal, lighting, catering work, etc. It is also in the evidence of DW2 that on the occasion of the marriage of the accused, he (DW2) had made arrangements, at the request of the accused, at the place of marriage without taking any profit as the parents of the deceased were not financially well off. These facts have not been disputed at all by the prosecution. This, in turn, clearly shows that the accused was, even at the time of marriage, was aware of the financial constraints of the family of the deceased and he (accused) was as considerate to them as he could have been. Hence, it is very difficult to believe, without any convincing other evidence on record, that the accused would be demanding money as have been alleged by the prosecution, particularly, when the series of letters, written by the deceased and placed on record, indicate otherwise. 86. DW2 has deposed that on 13.11.86, the wife of the accused informed her over telephone that the accused had sustained injury, on the previous night, as a result of his scooter having skidded, and when he visited, he saw injury on the right foot ankle of the accused; the accused told him that his scooter skidded on stones, whereupon he took the accused to Military Hospital and the doctor found that the accused had sustained fracture. DW2 has also proved the medical care sheet, prepared by the doctor, as Exhibit O. 87. According to the evidence of DW2, the engagement of Nilesh, i.e., brother of the deceased, was held at the house of DW2 at the request of the accused. Prosecution has virtually not cross-examined DW2 on any material aspects of his evidence. Thus, his whole evidence has remained unscathed and unshaken. 88. Close on the heels of the evidence of DW2, the evidence of his wife (DW3) is that she maintained good relation with the deceased. According to the evidence of DW3, the deceased had told her that she was lucky and happy to marry the accused. Thus, his whole evidence has remained unscathed and unshaken. 88. Close on the heels of the evidence of DW2, the evidence of his wife (DW3) is that she maintained good relation with the deceased. According to the evidence of DW3, the deceased had told her that she was lucky and happy to marry the accused. It is also in the evidence of DW3 that they used to visit the residence of the deceased and her husband, wherever they were posted, and the deceased was found to be happy and never made any complaint against her husband. 89. DW3 has deposed that on 13.11.86, she received a phone call from Kiran saying that accused had sustained injury on his scooter having skidded on stone and requested her to send her husband (DW2), whereupon her husband (DW3) went to the house of the accused and took the accused to hospital. DW3 has also deposed that Kiran was quite concerned about the injury of the accused. It is in the evidence of DW2 that Kiran was, at Dehradun, in the year 1987 and, hence, that there was no question of the deceased staying at Meerut at 1987. These assertions of DW3 have gone completely unchallenged by the prosecution. In fact, there was no pointed cross-examination on any material aspects of the evidence ofDW3 too. Hence, her evidence that the deceased used to be happy with her husband cannot be brushed aside. Thus, in the light of the evidence of DW2 and DW3, when the deceased had herself told that her husband had sustained injury in a scooter accident and when the evidence so given remained unshaken, there is no reason for this Court to disbelieve her evidence. 90. PW1 claims that at the time of her son's marriage, the accused had asked Kiran to demand bangle, because bangles had been made for the son of the accused, but Kiran refused and a quarrel ensued between the two. PW1, nowhere, claims that following the quarrel, which so took place, Kiran was assaulted by the accused. 90. PW1 claims that at the time of her son's marriage, the accused had asked Kiran to demand bangle, because bangles had been made for the son of the accused, but Kiran refused and a quarrel ensued between the two. PW1, nowhere, claims that following the quarrel, which so took place, Kiran was assaulted by the accused. As against the accusation so made by PW1, her husband's evidence is that Kiran had been given a pair of gold bangle on the occasion of the said marriage, but the accused refused to accept the same and demanded a pair of Kangan, because Kangan had been given to his daughter-in-law by PW2 and that it was after great persuasion that Kiran was allowed to accept the bangles. Thus, it is more than clear that both these witnesses do not corroborate each other; rather, they destroy the credibility of each other's evidence inasmuch as PW1 claims that the accused had demanded bangles, because Anr. bangle had been made for the son of the accused; whereas PW2 claims that since a pair of Kangan had been given to the daughter-in-law of their elder son and Kiran had been given a pair of gold bangles, the accused refused to accept the same by demanding a pair of Kangan. 91. Though PW11 has deposed that the accused had demanded kangan, because kangan had been given to the wife of PW11 and as Kiran had refused to raise any such demand for kangan, a quarrel had taken place between Kiran and her husband, it is admitted position that in his previous statement made by PW11 to CBI, he (PW11) was completely silent in this regard. 92. Because of the reason that the evidence of PW11, as has been discussed above, shows that this witness has been making accusations, which have not been supported by any other evidence, but are belied by the evidence of his parents, this witness's evidence, with regard to the alleged demand for kangan, raised by the accused, cannot be safely relied upon. 93. On the occasion of Mundan ceremony of the son of the accused, the accused, according to PW1, quarreled with Kiran on the ground that nothing had been given from her parental side. 93. On the occasion of Mundan ceremony of the son of the accused, the accused, according to PW1, quarreled with Kiran on the ground that nothing had been given from her parental side. The evidence, so given by PW 1, has not been corroborated by PW2 inasmuch as PW2, nowhere, claims that the accused, even on the occasion of Mundan ceremony, had quarreled with Kiran on the ground that no gift had been given by her parents on the occasion of Mundan ceremony of their son. 94. PW1 has claimed that the second wife of the accused has also left the accused; but this allegation has been denied. No evidence has been adduced by the prosecution to show that the accusation, so made by PW1, is correct. Hence, no credence can be given to such an assertion of PW1. 95. According to PW1, cash amount and gold ornaments had been kept in the bank in the name of the mother of the accused and Kiran was not allowed to use the same. Even PW2 claims that after about 15 days of marriage, the accused took all ornaments except the bangles and kept the same in a locker. Letters written by Kiran do not, however, support such accusations. 96. In the light of the nature of evidence of PW1 and PW2 as discussed above, when one considers the letters written by the deceased to her mother, Exts. F, G and H and the notings in her personal diary, Ext. J, what clearly transpires is that the parents of the deceased had very strained relation and the deceased had written to her mother saying that it was because of their strained relation that their sons were not living with them. 97. What is curious to note is that while in her examination-in-chief, PW1 had claimed that the accused used to torture her daughter, Kiran, she admitted, in her cross-examination, that the deceased never used to complaint about the torture meted out to her. 98. In respect of any aspect of its case, the prosecution has not been able to adduce consistent, coherent, corroborative and re-conciliable evidence. 98. In respect of any aspect of its case, the prosecution has not been able to adduce consistent, coherent, corroborative and re-conciliable evidence. Broadly speaking, there may be omnibus allegations made against the accused, such as, he has been demanding money from the parents of the deceased, he had been torturing the deceased by assaulting or by not giving her day-to-day expenses or by humiliating her in the presence of the other members of her parental family, the fact of the matter, however, remains that even these omnibus evidence have, on close scrutiny, and as already discussed above, stand belied, when the evidence, adduced as a whole by the prosecution, is considered. None of the prosecution witnesses can, therefore, be implicitly relied upon. 99. Thus, even if the evidence of the prosecution witnesses is not rejected as wholly unreliable, these witnesses will, at best, fall in the category of those witnesses, who are neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. It is trite that a witness may fall into any of the three categories, namely, wholly reliable, wholly unreliable or neither reliable nor wholly unreliable. If a witness is wholly reliable, his sole testimony may be sufficient to warrant conviction of an accused. If a witness is wholly unreliable, there is no difficulty in rejecting outright his evidence. The difficulty is, however, faced, when a witness is neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. The evidence of this category of witnesses, that is, these witnesses, who are neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable, should not be, ordinarily, rejected outright; rather, the court shall make all endeavours to ascertain if there is any credible corroboration, direct or circumstantial from other evidence on record. If such corroboration is not received, the Court shall have no option, but to reject the evidence of such a witness. It is, however, of immense importance to note that if two witnesses are unreliable, they cannot be taken to have corroborated each other, because it is not the number of witnesses, but the quality of evidence given by them, which is the determining factor. 100. In the present case, when the prosecution witnesses are all found to be unreliable, they cannot be taken to have corroborated each other merely because of the fact that there has been more than one witness, though unreliable, repeating similar omnibus accusations against the accused-Appellant. 101. 100. In the present case, when the prosecution witnesses are all found to be unreliable, they cannot be taken to have corroborated each other merely because of the fact that there has been more than one witness, though unreliable, repeating similar omnibus accusations against the accused-Appellant. 101. Because of what have been discussed and pointed out above, when one considers the evidence on record, as a whole, it becomes clear that none of the prosecution witnesses, who have made the accusations in support of the prosecution's case that the deceased used to be tortured by the accused, can be said to be reliable and trustworthy. In such circumstances, if I may reiterate, none of the witnesses, whose evidence have been discussed, can be safely relied upon. On a careful scrutiny of the evidence on record, it becomes clear that the prosecution's case is an admixture of half truth and untruth and the truth, if any, is so inextricably mixed with falsehood that it has become impossible to disengage the truth, if any, from the falsehood. Situated thus, it becomes clear that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, and the quality of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the prosecution could not have been held to have proved the charges against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. At any rate, in the face of the quality of evidence on record, the accused-Appellant ought to have been given, at least, benefit of doubt. 102. In the result and for the reasons discussed above, this appeal succeeds. The impugned order of conviction and the sentence passed against the accused-Appellant is hereby set aside. The accused-Appellant is held not guilty of the offences charged with and he is acquitted of the same under benefit of doubt. The bail bond of the accused-Appellant shall stand cancelled and his surety shall stand discharged. 103. With the above observations and discussions, this appeal shall stand disposed of.