JUDGMENT [Per : Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. (Oral)] This appeal, preferred under Section 374 Cr.P.C., is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.2.1997 passed by IInd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Haridwar in S.T. No. 140/96 thereby convicting the appellant under Section 304B I.P.C. for life imprisonment and under Section 498-A I.P.C. for three years’ rigorous imprisonment. 2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that deceased Kaushalya Devi got married to the accused Ram Kumar, according to Hindu rites and rituals, on 22.6.1990. Kalka Prasad (PW-1), father of the deceased Kaushalya Devi, is the complainant. The prosecution case is that the deceased was ill treated for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry before her death. According ot the prosecution, accused Ram Kumar demanded Motorcycle in the marriage, but the same could not be fulfilled by Kalka Prasad, father of the deceased. On account of the same accused Ram Kumar used to make demand of motorcycle continuously and used to threat deceased Kaushalya Devi to kill her in case of non-fulfillment of his demand. The deceased Kaushalya Devi was harassed by her in-laws also. It has been alleged that Kaushalya Devi had come in her parents house before her death on the occasion of ‘Raksha Bandhan’ and when deceased Ram Kumar and his father Ram Sahai had come to take the deceased, then they also demanded the motorcycle and a sum of Rs. 20,000/- and they also threatened the complainant that in case of non-fulfillment of their demand they would kill Kaushalya Devi. At this Kalka Prasad said that he would give the said amount by selling his land. Thereafter, Kaushalya Devi used to live with her husband Ram Kumar in Haridwar. On 22.9.1995, Kaushalya Devi was admitted in hospital by accused Ram Kumar in 100% burn condition and on the same day at 9.30 p.m. Kaushalya Devi died in the hospital. The funeral of the deceased was conducted by Ram Kumar and thereafter he sent the telegram to the father of the deceased about the burning and death of his daughter Kaushalya Devi. After some days Kalka Prasad along with Surjeet Singh came to Haridwar. Kalka Prasad fell ill on account of death of her daughter and returned back to Jhansi, where he lodged a complaint to the S.P. Jhansi, which was sent to Haridwar vide Ext .Ka.1. 3. On the basis of the said complaint, Chick F.I.R. No. 60/95 (Ext.Ka. After some days Kalka Prasad along with Surjeet Singh came to Haridwar. Kalka Prasad fell ill on account of death of her daughter and returned back to Jhansi, where he lodged a complaint to the S.P. Jhansi, which was sent to Haridwar vide Ext .Ka.1. 3. On the basis of the said complaint, Chick F.I.R. No. 60/95 (Ext.Ka. 14) was registered and Case Crime No. Nil/95 under Section 304B was registered and remitted from Jhansi to Haridwar vide G.D. No. 17 dated 12.10.95 as Ext.Ka. 15, where Case Crime No. 1027/95 was registered against the accused persons vide G.D. No. 28 and investigation of the case was entrusted to PW-5 Ishwar Dutt Sharma, C.O. City. PW-7 Dr. K.C. Pant has medically examined the deceased before her death. On 22.9.1995 at 9.30 p.m. after the death of Kaushalya Devi, information about her death was given by the sweeper Dinesh, which entry was made in the General Diary as Report No. 51 as Ext. Ka. 13. On 23.9.1995 at 11.00 a.m., PW-8 R.K. Singh visited the hospital and prepared the inquest report of the dead body of the deceased and prepared its Fard as Ext. Ka. 24. During the course of investigation the investigating officer (PW-5) inspected the place of occurrence and prepared site plan (Ext. Ka.8), recorded the statement of witnesses and after completion of investigation charge sheet was submitted against the accused Ram Kumar for his trial in respect of offence punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A I.P.C. 4. The learned Magistrate on receipt of the charge sheet after giving necessary copies to the accused as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. appears to have committed the case to the court of Sessions for trial on 15.4.1996. The learned Sessions Judge after hearing the parties framed charge of offence punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A I.P.C. against the appellant/accused Ram Kumar. However, accused Ram Sahai was acquitted of the charge levelled against him for want of evidence. The accused Ram Kumar pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. The prosecution in support of its case got examined as many as eight witnesses. PW-1 complainant Kalka Prasad is the father of the dceased Kaushalya Devi. PW-2 Awadh Rani is the Pradhan of the village. PW-3 Rajendra Kumar was the then City Magistrate. PW-4 Dr. The accused Ram Kumar pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. The prosecution in support of its case got examined as many as eight witnesses. PW-1 complainant Kalka Prasad is the father of the dceased Kaushalya Devi. PW-2 Awadh Rani is the Pradhan of the village. PW-3 Rajendra Kumar was the then City Magistrate. PW-4 Dr. H.K. Faloria is the doctor who proved the post mortem report of the deceased Kaushalya Devi. PW-5 Ishwar Dutt Sharma is the investigating officer of the case, who prepared the site plan, recorded the statement of the witnesses and submitted charge sheet. PW-6 Sobran Singh is the constable who proved Chick G.D. etc. as Ext.14, PW-7 K.C. Pant has medically examined the deceased Kaushalya Devi before her death. PW-8 R.K. Singh is the Sub-Inspector who proved G.D. Ext.Ka. 21 and Ext. Ka.22 and panchayatnama (Ext. 25 to Ext. 28). 6. The accused person in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution case and alleged that deceased Kaushalya Devi had died on account of bursting of stove and he has been falsely implicated in the case due to enmity. Towards documentary evidence, the accused Ram Kumar adduced three photographs, two papers of telegram, one receipt of purchasing of wood for cremation, two receipts of telegram and one newspaper item published in Hindi daily ‘Amar Ujala’ dated 24.9.94. 7. The trial court having considered the entire evidence on record and hearing learned counsel for the parties found the accused/appellant Ram Kumar guilty of charge of offence punishable under Section 304B and 498A I.P.C. After hearing on sentence, the trial court sentenced the accused/appellant to undergo imprisonment for life on first count and to undergo three years’ rigorous imprisonment on second count, vide judgment and order dated 25.2.1997. 8. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment and order, the accused/appellant has preferred the present appeal which has been placed before us for disposal. 9. We have heard Sri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent and perused the record. 10. In this case the accused/appellant Ram Kumar has been convicted under Section 304B I.P.C. and 498-A I.P.C. According to the prosecution, accused Ram Kumar used to make demand of motorcycle as dowry from the parents of the deceased Kaushalya Devi. PW-1 Kalka Prasad, father of the deceased, has narrated the prosecution story. 10. In this case the accused/appellant Ram Kumar has been convicted under Section 304B I.P.C. and 498-A I.P.C. According to the prosecution, accused Ram Kumar used to make demand of motorcycle as dowry from the parents of the deceased Kaushalya Devi. PW-1 Kalka Prasad, father of the deceased, has narrated the prosecution story. This witness has stated the fact of demand of motorcycle by the accused. He has also stated that the deceased Kaushalya Devi had told him that accused also beaten her. When the deceased Kaushalya Devi had gone to the house of her in laws at Raksha Bandhan, then accused Ram Kumar also beaten her. The accused continuously used to beat the deceased on account of non-fulfillment of demand of motorcycle. The accused also used to threaten to kill the deceased for non-fulfillment of his demand. This witness has further stated that accused had demanded motorcycle before him and had beaten the deceased Kaushalya Devi in his presence. This witness has also been cross examined by the defence at length. In his cross examination this witness has stated that the deceased Kaushalya Devi has told to him about the ill-treatment and unlawful demand of dowry by the accused as and when she visited her Maika. 11. The statement of PW-1 Kalka Prasad is also corroborated by PW-2 Awadh Rani, Pradhan of the village. This witness has stated that after the marriage of the deceased, accused Ram Kumar and his father had made demand of motorcycle and in her presence accused Ram Kumar did Marpeet with the deceased Kaushalya Devi. The accused had tied Kaushalya Devi with the rope used in tying the cattle. This witness has further stated that Kalka Prasad, father of the deceased, had sold his 5 Bighas of land in Rs. 50,000/- and gave Rs. 10,000/- to the accused Ram Kumar and his father Ram Sahai in her presence. After some time the accused demand further sum of Rs. 20,000/- from the father of the deceased Kaushalya Devi. This witness also stated that deceased Kaushalya Devi used to visit her house also and she had told her that her husband and father-in-law threatened to kill her in case she did not bring Rs. 20,000/- from her father. 12. Further, the medical evidence corroborates the ocular version of the prosecution witnesses. This witness also stated that deceased Kaushalya Devi used to visit her house also and she had told her that her husband and father-in-law threatened to kill her in case she did not bring Rs. 20,000/- from her father. 12. Further, the medical evidence corroborates the ocular version of the prosecution witnesses. From the post mortem report it has become quite clear that death of the deceased Kaushalya Devi was not natural. According to PW-4 Dr. H.K. Phuloriya, Medical Officer, who has conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased, has found 100% superficial burn present all over the body. The Medical Officer (PW-4) opined that the deceased died due to shock as a result of extensive ante mortem burn. 13. The defence version is that the death of the deceased Kaushalya Devi was accidental as the stove was burst and deceased was burnt in the fire. But, the defence story is not supported by the facts and circumstances of the case. PW-5 Ishwar Dutt Sharma, Investigating Officer of the case, inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site plan (Ext. Ka.8). Perusal of the site plan reveals that the Investigating Officer had not seen any damaged stove at the place of occurrence. No suggestion was put to this witness from the defence side that death of the deceased Kaushalya Devi was accidental and stove had burst at the spot. The defence story appears to be an afterthought in order to save the accused from the clutches of law. After the incident accused was not found at his house and he had absconded. The conduct of the accused also shows that after commission of the crime he had absconded. Therefore, in view of the evidence on record we find that the accused/appellant had made demand of dowry in the form of motorcycle or Rs. 20,000/- from the father of the deceased and on account of non-fulfillment of unlawful demand of dowry he used to threaten her and also used to beat her and at last the accused killed her by burning the deceased Kaushalya Devi. The Medical Officer (PW-4), who has conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased, has found 100% superficial burn present all over the body of the deceased Kaushalya Devi. 14. The Medical Officer (PW-4), who has conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased, has found 100% superficial burn present all over the body of the deceased Kaushalya Devi. 14. In the complaint given to the S.P. Jhansi it is alleged by the complainant that marriage between the deceased Kaushalya Devi and accused Ram Kumar took place on 12.6.1990. This fact has also been admitted by the accused himself in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The incident took place on 22.9.1995. Thus, it become quite clear that incident took place within seven years of the marriage of the deceased and the accused. That being so, it is proved that ingredients of offence punishable under Section 304-B I.P.C. are made out in the present case. 15. As far as the demand of dowry is concerned, the report made by the complainant Kalka Prasad (PW-1), father of the deceased, to the S.P. Jhansi, a copy of which is Ext. Ka.1, shows that allegation of demand of dowry in the form of motorcycle and a sum of Rs. 20,000/-, has been made by the accused Ram Kumar and his father Ram Sahai. PW-2 Awadh Rani has stated in his statement that Rs. 20,000/- was demanded by the accused and his father to be paid else Kaushalya Devi would be killed. Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, the conviction recorded by the trial court under Section 498-A I.P.C. is also justified as the ingredients of the said offence are proved beyond reasonable doubt. 16. From a plain reading of the depositions of prosecution witnesses, we find that in all respects the testimony of these witnesses is natural and trustworthy. Further, the prosecution version gets corroboration from the medical evidence adduced by PW-4. We are of the view that the prosecution has been fully successful in proving its case against the appellant/accused Ram Kumar beyond reasonable doubt for the offence under Section 304B I.P.C. and 498A I.P.C. 17. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the sentence awarded by the trial court is on higher side and it should be reduced. We do not find any force in the submission advanced by learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the sentence awarded by the trial court is on higher side and it should be reduced. We do not find any force in the submission advanced by learned counsel for the appellant. The trial court has awarded sentence of life imprisonment under Section 304B I.P.C. and three years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 498A I.P.C. and directed that both the sentence shall run concurrently. The deceased had suffered 100% superficial burn injuries all over her body at the hands of the accused/appellant on account on non-fulfillment of illegal demand of dowry. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any ground to reduce the sentence awarded by the trial court. The sentence awarded by the trial court is quite reasonable and does not require any interference. 18. For the reasons stated above, we concur with the trial court that the prosecution has successfully proved the charge of offence under Sections 304B and 498A I.P.C. against accused Ram Kumar. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 19. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The judgment and order dated 25.02.1997 is hereby confirmed. The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds are cancelled. Registry is directed to send back the lower court record back so that the accused Ram Kumar may be taken into custody to serve out the sentence awarded by the trial court.