JUDGMENT : Nirmaljit Kaur, J. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.63/2015, Police Station Anandpur Kalu, District Pali for the offence under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 406 of the IPC. 2. The allegations in the FIR are that the petitioners have killed the deceased. It is further alleged that a blood stained stick was recovered which showed that they had killed the deceased before burning her. In spite of these allegations, the FIR was registered under Section 498-A, 304-B & 406 of the IPC. Accordingly, vide order dated 13.08.2015, the Investigating Officer was directed to be present before this Court. 3. In pursuance to the said order, Mr. Veer Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Jaitaran, District Pali is present in the Court. It is stated before this Court that when he reached the spot, he found no evidence of offence under Section 302 IPC. No doubt, he took into custody a stick but the same was at the behest of the father of the deceased. The said stick was lying outside the room. It was not blood stained but there was some red colour present on it and on the insistance of the father of the deceased, he took the same into possession. As per his investigation, he found that the husband of the deceased was unemployed. She wanted him to shift to her parents house and work there. But things did not work out. The deceased sent her minor children of two years away to her parents house just one day before committing suicide. It is further stated that he also recorded the statements of neighbours etc., who stated that they had neither seen nor heard anything unusual or any serious quarrel or fight between the family members. One of the neighbours also stated that father and husband of the deceased were outside the house. When he saw the smoke coming from the room, he informed the petitioner who rushed inside and tried to extinguish the fire. Learned counsel for the complainant does not dispute that there were burn injuries on the hands of the husband. In this connection, the Investigating Officer is stated to have registered the offence under Section 304-B IPC as the death had occurred within 7 years of marriage. 4. Now, the question is with respect to the evidence of 304-B IPC. Learned counsel for the complainant does not dispute that there were burn injuries on the hands of the husband. In this connection, the Investigating Officer is stated to have registered the offence under Section 304-B IPC as the death had occurred within 7 years of marriage. 4. Now, the question is with respect to the evidence of 304-B IPC. The allegations are vague. They are not specific. No time, date or article demanded has been mentioned and nor it is mentioned as to which particular family member had demanded the dowry. Hence, the ingredients of Section 113-B of the Evidence Act, which are necessary to make out an offence under Section 304-B IPC, are missing. In any case, the present petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to release the petitioners on bail. 5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners (1) Babu Mohammed S/o Misru Khan and (2) Lali @ Hasina Bano W/o Babu Mohammed shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so. However, nothing said herein above will have any bearing on the merit of the case.