Judgment : Rajiv Sharma, J. These appeals are instituted against Judgment dated 10.11.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh in Sessions Case No. 25/99 RBT 11/2004, whereby appellant-accused namely Yashpal (hereinafter referred to as ‘accused’ for convenience sake), was convicted and sentenced under Sections 302 and 498A IPC and acquitted of offences punishable under Section 304-B and 315 IPC. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further under go simple imprisonment for one year under Section 302 IPC. He was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of 2,000/- for offence under Section 498-A IPC and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for two months. Appellant-accused Sarla Devi (hereinafter referred to as ‘accused’ for convenience sake) was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of 2,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code In default of payment of fine, she is to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months. 2. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in both the appeals, they were taken up together and are being disposed of vide this common judgment. 3. Case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 17.1.1999 at about 10.15 PM a telephonic information was received in the Police Station Gagret from Kashmir Singh Up Pradhan Gram Panchayat Oel regarding death of Meena Kumari wife of Yashpal. Thereafter, police from police station Gagret went to the spot. Dead body was found with the help of torch, lying in the bushes at a distance of 200 meters from the house of the accused. Shri Onkar Singh, PW-4 inspected the body of Meena Kumari. He noticed scars on the face and other parts of the body. Parents of the deceased also came there. PW-14 Onkar Singh recorded the statement of Darshan Singh, brother of the deceased under Section 154 Cr. P. C. He disclosed that Meena Kumari was his younger sister and was married to accused in November 1995. They had given dowry in the marriage according to their capacity but accused were not satisfied. Parents of the deceased also came there. PW-14 Onkar Singh recorded the statement of Darshan Singh, brother of the deceased under Section 154 Cr. P. C. He disclosed that Meena Kumari was his younger sister and was married to accused in November 1995. They had given dowry in the marriage according to their capacity but accused were not satisfied. After 3-4 months of marriage when deceased Meena Kumari came to her parental house, she told the complainant and her parents that she was being harassed by her husband Yashpal and her mother-inlaw Sarla Devi used to taunt her for not bringing sufficient dowry. On the complaint of Meena Kumari, complainant and parents visited the house of accused many times and requested not to harass her. Thereafter, accused shunted Meena Kumari out of their house. She came to the house of her parents at village Nagnoli and remained there for about 3-4 months where she gave birth to a daughter. Nobody came to look after Meena Kumari and her daughter. Meena Kumari was sent back after convening a Khangi Panchayat, to her matrimonial house. Accused kept on harassing her. On 18.1.1999 a message was received by the complainant through one Jamal Deen of his village that Meena Kumari had died in village Oel. Compromise Ext. PF was taken into possession. Viscera of the deceased was sent to FSL Junga for chemical examination. According to the post-mortem report, deceased died due to fracture and dislocation of cervical vertebrae at level C-1-2 and C-2-3. Death was caused by beatings given to her with fist and kick blows. She was carrying pregnancy of 34-36 weeks. Matter was investigated and challan was put up in the Court after completing all codal formalities. 4. Prosecution has examined as many as 17 witnesses to prove its case against the accused. Accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr. P.C. Accused were convicted and sentenced as notice by us above. Hence, these two appeals. 5. Mr. N.S. Chandel, Advocate has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. 6. Mr. M.A. Khan, Additional Advocate General, has supported the judgment of trial court dated 10.11.2008. 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the judgment and record very carefully. 8. PW-1 Dr. Satinder Chauhan deposed that he alongwith Dr. Umesh Gautam and Dr. 6. Mr. M.A. Khan, Additional Advocate General, has supported the judgment of trial court dated 10.11.2008. 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the judgment and record very carefully. 8. PW-1 Dr. Satinder Chauhan deposed that he alongwith Dr. Umesh Gautam and Dr. Vipan Chaudhary conducted postmortem on the dead body of Meena Kumari. According to the postmortem report, there were multiple contusions and abrasions on the face of deceased. Upper part of neck which was reddish in colour with defused swelling on both sides of neck just below angles of mandible corresponding to haemorrahge present subcutaneous. There was no ligature marks on the neck. Rigor mortis was present. There was fracture of cervical vertebrae at C1-2 and C2-3. Postmortem report is Ext. PB. According to Satinder Chauhan, PW-1, deceased was pregnant and there was no evidence of rape, as per post-mortem report. He did not take swab since rape was not suspected. 9. PW-2 Shri Darshan Kumar is brother of deceased. According to him, Meena was married to Yashpal, accused in the month of November 1995 as per Hindu rites. She was harassed by her in-laws. They used to give beatings to Meena Kumari for bringing insufficient dowry. Accused also demanded money from his sister for the purpose of colour TV, fridge, Scooter etc. 3-4 months after marriage Meena came to their house and told that she was being maltreated and given beatings for bringing insufficient dowry. His sister gave birth to a daughter, however, nobody came from the side of in-laws of Meena to enquire about her well-being. A Khangi Panchayat was convened. He admitted that his sister has also consumed poison due to maltreatment by the accused. He came to know about death of his sister on 18.1.1999. He went to the spot. Dead body of his sister was also lying there. He noticed scratches and injuries on the face and neck. Blood was oozing from nose and mouth. Neck was swollen. 10. PW-3 Kashmir Singh deposed that he was Up Pradhan of village Oel. On 17.1.1999, at about 7.30-7.45 Pawan Kumar Ward Panch came to him and told that wife of Yashpal had died. Body was in the bushes. He informed the police. He noticed injury on the face of the deceased. Police came to the spot. They took into possession the tooth, Ext. P1, Shawl Ext. On 17.1.1999, at about 7.30-7.45 Pawan Kumar Ward Panch came to him and told that wife of Yashpal had died. Body was in the bushes. He informed the police. He noticed injury on the face of the deceased. Police came to the spot. They took into possession the tooth, Ext. P1, Shawl Ext. P2, pair of Chappal Ext. P3 and broken bangles Ext. P4. House of the accused was also searched. He was declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. 11. PW-4 Amrit Lal deposed that Meena Kumari was his daughter and married in 1995. Her in-laws used to harass her for bringing insufficient dowry including fridge, TV Scooter etc. Accused also gave beatings and tortured his daughter by calling her names. She gave birth to a daughter about 3 years back in their house. No one from the family of her in-laws came at that time to enquire about the welfare of Meena Kumari and her child. His daughter remained in the house only for 4-5 months. He took Jaswant and Jagan Nath with him to the house of accused where a Khangi Panchayat was held. In the Khangi Panchayat, a compromise was effected. He proved Ext. PF, the compromise. It was signed by Meena Kumari and Yashpal. Even after the compromise, she was harassed. In his cross-examination, he has admitted that earlier also, his daughter had taken poison and was saved by her husband Yashpal and his brother by calling his daughter and giving timely treatment. 12. PW-5 Bhagat Singh deposed that he attended the marriage ceremony of Yashpal and Meena Kumari. After marriage Meena Kumari met him many times. She complained to him that her husband and mother-in-law used to demand dowry articles like fridge, TV, Scooter etc. he went to the spot where body of Meena Kumari was lying. There were signs of throttling the neck, injuries on face and blood was oozing out from the nose and mouth. 13. PW-6 Shri Ram deposed that before death of Meena Kumari, a Khangi Panchayat was held in the village in the house of the accused. Father of Meena Kumari alongwith 2-3 persons was present in the Khangi Panchayat on the complaint of the girl. 14. PW-7 Jaswant Singh deposed that the after marriage, Meena Kumari used to meet him in the village. Father of Meena Kumari alongwith 2-3 persons was present in the Khangi Panchayat on the complaint of the girl. 14. PW-7 Jaswant Singh deposed that the after marriage, Meena Kumari used to meet him in the village. She used to tell him that her husband and mother-in-law used to torture her for touching household articles by saying that these were not brought by her. 15. PW-8 Kamla Devi is mother of deceased. She also deposed the manner in which her daughter was tortured by the accused for bringing insufficient dowry. First child was born to Meena in their house but accused never came to enquire about the wellbeing of Meena or her child. A compromise was also arrived at. Meena was brought back to their house and again wept and told that accused were demanding more dowry and her life was in danger. 16. PW-9, PW-10, PW-11 and PW-12 are all formal witnesses. 17. PW-13 Yog Raj deposed that Onkar Singh SI deposited one sealed parcel containing viscera of Meena Kumari which he kept in the Malkhana. It was sent to FSL Junga through Constable Pardeep on 3.2.1999. 18. PW-14 Onkar Singh has deposed that he received a telephonic information on 17.1.1999. It was recorded in Rojnamcha. He went to the spot and with the help of torch, dead body was inspected by him. He found swelling on the neck of dead body of Meena. He also noticed blood oozing from nose and mouth of deceased. There were blue scars on face and other parts of the body. Statement of brother of the deceased was recorded vide Ext. PC under Section 154 Cr. P. C. Inquest report Ext. PD was prepared. Postmortem report was obtained. 19. PW-15 Kashmir Singh DSP Vigilance deposed that a compromise Ext. PF was produced by Shashi Pal, which was taken into possession vide memo Ext. PJ. He got accused medically examined on 21.1.1999. He could not get accused examined on 19.1.1999. 20. PW-17 N.K. Bhardwaj has examined the accused andm found following injuries on the body of accused:- “1. Brown coloured abrasion 1.5 cm x 0.2 cm on right cheek 2cm away from right lower id. 2. another brownish coloured abrasion present 1cm away from angle or mandible on left side neck.” 21. What emerges from the statements of witnesses is that the marriage between Yashpal and deceased Meena Kumari was solemnised in 1995. Brown coloured abrasion 1.5 cm x 0.2 cm on right cheek 2cm away from right lower id. 2. another brownish coloured abrasion present 1cm away from angle or mandible on left side neck.” 21. What emerges from the statements of witnesses is that the marriage between Yashpal and deceased Meena Kumari was solemnised in 1995. She was maltreated for bringing insufficient dowry. She was administered beatings by the accused. A Khangi Panchayat was also convened. A compromise Ext. PF was arrived at. Despite that she was tortured and harassed by the accused. Deceased gave birth to a daughter in her parental house. No member from the family of accused came to enquire about welfare of the deceased or her child. Accused used to demand fridge, TV, Scooter etc. as per statement of PW-2 Darshan Kumar, PW-4 Amrit Lal and PW-8 Kamla Devi. 22. Dead body was found at a distance of 200 metres from the house of accused. He has not lodged any missing report with the police or made any enquiry of whereabouts of his wife. According to PW-1, deceased died due to fracture /dislocation of cervical vertebrae at C-1-2 and C-2-3. Deceased was pregnant and was carrying pregnancy of 34-36 weeks. In his cross-examination, he stated that fracture and dislocation of cervical vertebrae could be caused by twisting neck with great force with hands. Accused Yashpal has also received injuries as per statement of Dr. NK Bhardwaj (PW-17). He also opined that injuries were possible in a scuffle. 23. Mr. NS Chandel argued that accused was not medically examined immediately. Merely that the accused was not medically examined immediately would not rule out the injuries received by the accused. PW-5 Bhagat Singh has deposed that the accused has made extra-judicial confession before him. Yashpal said that an altercation between him and Meena. There was a scuffle in the kitchen of the accused. Broken bangles of Meena Kumari were in the kitchen. Yashpal told that he was not given food by Meena Kumari. He further told that at 5.00 pm Meena had gone out to ease herself. He followed her and gave her beatings severely out of anger. She died due to beatings. Deceased has taken poison earlier. It further strengthens the prosecution case that the deceased was tortured and harassed by accused. He further told that at 5.00 pm Meena had gone out to ease herself. He followed her and gave her beatings severely out of anger. She died due to beatings. Deceased has taken poison earlier. It further strengthens the prosecution case that the deceased was tortured and harassed by accused. Otherwise there was no occasion for a young lady like Meena Kumari to consume poison or to convene a Khangi Panchayat as Ext. PF. Ext. PF also suggests that the deceased was maltreated and harassed and tortured by the accused. 24. Mr. NS Chandel also argued that in fact somebody has tried to rape her since her string was found loose. PW-1 Dr. Satinder Chauhan has categorically opined that there was no evidence of rape as per post-mortem report. Deceased has died due to fist and kick blows given by the accused. Police has taken into possession tooth Ext. P1, blood stained Shawl Ext. P2, a pair of Chappals Ext. P-3 and broken bangles Ext. P4. Mr. N.S. Chandel has lastly argued that prosecution has attributed no motive to the accused. It is true that in a case based on circumstantial evidence, motive plays an important role. However, when the chain of events is complete, motive is not very important. In this case, though there is no eyewitness but the prosecution has completed the entire chain of events pointing exclusively to the guilt of the accused. There is sufficient material on record to prove that deceased was tortured and harassed by both the accused for bringing insufficient dowry. Neither Yashpal nor his mother have visited the house of deceased at the time of child birth. Meena Kumari was also forced to consume poison earlier. PW-5 Bhagat Singh, PW-7 Jaswant have deposed categorically that as and when Meena Kumai used to meet them, she used to complain about being harassed by her in-laws for bringing insufficient dowry. Acts of the accused fall under the ambit of ‘cruelty’. Relation between accused and deceased did not improve even after convening the Khangi Panchayat. Depositions have been made by witnesses only against accused and not against other family members of the accused. 25. Accordingly, the prosecution has fully proved its case against the accused Yashpal under Section 302 and 498-A IPC and accused Sarla Devi under Section 498-A. There is no occasion for us to interfere in the well-reasoned judgment of the trial Court. Depositions have been made by witnesses only against accused and not against other family members of the accused. 25. Accordingly, the prosecution has fully proved its case against the accused Yashpal under Section 302 and 498-A IPC and accused Sarla Devi under Section 498-A. There is no occasion for us to interfere in the well-reasoned judgment of the trial Court. Consequently, both the appeals fail and are dismissed, so also the pending applications, if any, in both the appeals. Bail bonds are cancelled.