JUDGMENT : Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. The present appeal is maintained by the appellant against the acquittal of the accused respondents No. 1 to 3 (hereinafter called as ‘the respondents’) acquitting the accused persons in Sessions Case No.10/2008, under Sections 498-A, 306, 34 IPC, Police Station, Bangana, FIR No.12/08, and granting them the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act. After their conviction under Section 498-A IPC read with Section 34 IPC, the State has been made party as respondent No.4. 2. Briefly stating the facts giving rise to the present appeal, as per the prosecution story, are that on 03.2.2008, complainant Ramesh Kumar made telephonic call to the police that his daughter Kiran Bala had died in her in-laws house in suspicious circumstances, on which ASI Kaur Chand alongwith H.C. Vipan Kumar, HHC Purshotam Singh, HHC Rakesh Kumar, LC Anita Devi and HHC Kishori Lal went to village Dargehri where Ramesh Kumar made a statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. to the police that he had two daughters and a son. The marriage of his elder daughter, Kiran Bala, was solemnized with the accused, Shashi Bhushan, on 10.12.2006 in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies. At the time of marriage, Tarlok Chand, father of the accused, Shashi Bhushan, disclosed that they owned a bus. After the marriage, said Tarlok Chand gave that bus to his son-in-law namely Pawan Kumar. Upon this a dispute had arisen between them. The in-laws of his daughter started blaming Kiran Bala for the same. Her husband Shashi Bhushan, her mother-in-law Kanta Devi and sister-in-law Kumari Bandana Devi used to humiliate and taunt her on the pretext that she was not lucky for them and that the peace of the family has been lost after her marriage. They also used to beat her and called her as ‘Manhoos’ and also for many days the accused persons had even stopped talking with her. Kiran Bala disclosed these facts to him. She also disclosed that the accused namely Shashi Bhushan was having illicit relations with a woman and the family members were also aware of the fact. It has further been alleged that on 3.2.2008, at about 2.52 a.m., the father-in-law of Kiran Bala informed him telephonically that she had committed suicide by hanging herself. She also disclosed that the accused namely Shashi Bhushan was having illicit relations with a woman and the family members were also aware of the fact. It has further been alleged that on 3.2.2008, at about 2.52 a.m., the father-in-law of Kiran Bala informed him telephonically that she had committed suicide by hanging herself. When he alongwith other people reached in the house of the accused, he was told that mother-in-law of Kiran Bala had put her dead body in her lap and her husband Shashi Bhushan had put his arms around her neck. He was only allowed to see her face. He saw the ligature mark on the neck of the deceased Kiran Bala and there were contusion marks on her neck and he suspected that either the accused persons had killed her daughter or forced her to commit suicide. On the basis of the statement of complainant Ramesh Kumar FIR Ex.PW6/B was recorded. During the course of investigation, the police recorded the statement of the witnesses, the photographs of dead body were clicked and spot map was prepared, the police also took into possession the clothes of the deceased and other incriminating articles. Suicide note and note book written by the deceased, were also taken into possession by the police. Post-mortem of the dead body was also conducted. On receipt of the report of F.S.L., the challan was presented in the Court, which was assigned to the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No.1, Una. The learned Magistrate supplied the copies of the challan to the accused persons under Section 207 Cr.P.C. and thereafter, committed the case vide order dated 20.4.2009, to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Una, who thereafter assigned the case to the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Una for its trial. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents as well as the learned Additional Advocate General for the State-respondent and also have gone through the record of the case in detail. 4. To prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and the statement of accused persons was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein they have denied the case of the prosecution. However, accused Shashi Bhushan vide his statement wanted to lead evidence in defence, but when opportunity was granted to him, he gave up PW Dr. 4. To prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and the statement of accused persons was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein they have denied the case of the prosecution. However, accused Shashi Bhushan vide his statement wanted to lead evidence in defence, but when opportunity was granted to him, he gave up PW Dr. Jagdishwar Kanwar and closed his evidence. 5. The Police has taken into possession the notebook Ext. P1, alleged to have been written by the deceased Kiran Bala. Seizure memo Ex.OPW1/A was prepared by the Investigating Officer, which bears the signatures of HHC Purshotam Lal and as also that of Rakesh Kumar HHC. PW2 Pawan Kumar stated that he remained associated in the investigation of this case. On 5.2.2008, he handed-over one practical note book Ex.P1 to the police, which contained the handwriting of deceased Kiran Bala. Seizure memo. Ex. PW1/A was prepared to this effect. In cross-examination, he stated that Kiran Bala was the wife of his brother-in-law. She used to remain ill and was getting treatment from Dr. Jagdishwar and was also treated in Govt. Hospital, Una and Bhota. She was also suffering from depression. PW3 Basant Singh stated that he remained associated during the investigation of this case. On 7.2.2008, police took into possession one practical copy of Ex.P2 in his presence and that of Kishori Lal vide seizure memo. Ex.PW3/A. 6. PW4 Dr. G.Upadhaya M.O., PHC Tarsooh, District Bilaspur, H.P. stated that in the month of February, 2008, he was posted as Medical Officer in Regional Hospital, Una. On 3.2.2008, the police had moved an application Ex.PW4/A requesting therein for the postmortem of Smt. Kiran Bala, wife of Shashi Bhushan. On this SMO constituted a board of two doctors to conduct the post-mortem and he was one of the members of the Board. Other member of the board was Dr. Haroop Kaur. Along with application the police had supplied inquest report Exts. PW4/B and PW4/C, which were also seen by them at the time of post-mortem. He identified his signatures on the said document. 7. Post mortem of the deceased was conducted on 4.2.2008 at 10. 00 AM. On examination of the body, a ligature mark was present on the neck on the front side high up in the neck between chin and larynx. He identified his signatures on the said document. 7. Post mortem of the deceased was conducted on 4.2.2008 at 10. 00 AM. On examination of the body, a ligature mark was present on the neck on the front side high up in the neck between chin and larynx. The ligature was oblique and extending backward to the angle of mandible on the right side and 2.5 cms below mastoid process on the left side. The length of the ligature mark was 20 cms and its width was 1.5 cm, which was nearly same throughout. The base of the ligature marks was pale, hard and parchment like. Subcutaneous tissue was white and glistening under mark. Hyoid bone was found fractured from right side. No blood was present from the nose, mouth and ear. No injury was found in the scalp or skull. The vital parts of the body were found congested. They were of the opinion that the deceased had died due to asphyxia caused by hanging which was ante-mortem in nature. The post-mortem report was placed on record, which is Ex.PW4/E. which bears his signatures and the signatures of Dr. Haroop Kaur. In cross-examination, he admitted that they had mentioned in the post-mortem report that lividity was present. However, he could not say on which part it was present. No mark of injury was found on any part of the dead body of the deceased. Further that it was a typical case of suicidal hanging. 8. PW5 Rulia Ram stated that he is an agriculturist by profession and he knew Kiran Bala, daughter of Ramesh Kumar, resident of his village. He had further stated that, on 25.2.2008, at about 5.30 p.m., when he was going to a shop, Kiran Bala, who was coming from her matrimonial house met him and after hugging him he started crying. On inquiry, she told him that her husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law ill-treated her by giving her beatings. She also told that accused persons demanded One lac rupees and asked her to bring that amount from her parents as they wanted to purchase a Bus. He consoled her by saying that he shall be talking to her father in this behalf. After few days, she left her matrimonial house and thereafter never met him. She also told that accused persons demanded One lac rupees and asked her to bring that amount from her parents as they wanted to purchase a Bus. He consoled her by saying that he shall be talking to her father in this behalf. After few days, she left her matrimonial house and thereafter never met him. In cross examination, he stated that he did not tell about the disclosure made by Smt. Kiran Bala deceased to him to anyone including her parents. PWs Roshan Lal and Dr. Haroop Kaur were given up by the learned Public Prosecutor for the State. 9. PW-6. H.C. Ravi Dutt stated that on 3.02.2008, he was posted as MHC Police Station, Bangana. On that date a ruqua Ex.PW6/A was received in the Police Station through HHC Kishori Lal No.31. At that time, he was officiating as SHO, Police Station, Bangana. On the basis of the said ruqua F.I.R. Ex.PW6/A was registered in Police Station. After registering the F.I.R., endorsement Ex.PW6/C was made on the F.I.R. As per register No.19, brought by him, Investigating Officer deposited with him one sealed envelope, sealed with seal impression Una Mortuary. One more cloth parcel allegedly containing ‘Duptta’ of deceased and other parcel containing ornaments found on the dead body of the deceased were also received in the Police Station. Sealed parcel containing viscera of the deceased was also received by him in the Police Station. Case property was deposited by the I.O. along with the sample seal, photocopy of F.I.R., inquest forms PMR report and seizure memos. On 7.2.2008, the I.O. had deposited with him two sealed parcels allegedly containing note book and one practical copy of Kiran Bala. On 12.02.2008, the parcel containing the cloth of deceased, viscera of the deceased, Dupatta of the deceased and a sealed envelope were handed-over to C.Vinod Kumar No.281, vide R.C. No.28/08, for being taken to F.S.L., Junga. After depositing the case property, he brought the R.C. back on 14.02.2008. On 23.02.2008, a sealed parcel containing suicide note and pen, two parcels containing a note book each were handed over to C.Sodhi Ram No. 194 for being taken to F.S.L. Junga vide R.C. No.36/08, who after depositing the same at F.S.L. Junga, submitted receipt to him on 25.02.2008. 10. PW-7, C. Vinod Kumar, stated that in the year 2008, he was posted as Constable at Police Station, Bangana. 10. PW-7, C. Vinod Kumar, stated that in the year 2008, he was posted as Constable at Police Station, Bangana. On 12.02.2008 MHC Ravi Dutt had handed over him four sealed parcels along with one envelope, copy of F.I.R., copies of seizure memos, inquest report vide R.C. No.28/08 to be deposited at F.S.L., Junga. After depositing the case property at F.S.L. Junga, he returned the receipt to MHC on 14.02.2009. PW-8, C. Sodhi Ram No.194, stated that on 23.02.2008, MHC Ravi Dutt had handed over to him three sealed parcels along with sample seal, copy of F.I.R. and copy of seizure memo vide R.C. No. 36/08 to be deposited with F.S.L., Junga. He has also stated that after depositing the same at FSL, he handed over the receipt to MHC on 25.02.2008. 11. PW9 Ramesh Kumar stated that he had three children. Deceased Kiran Bala was his eldest child and was married to accused Shashi Bhushan in the month of December, 2006. After the marriage, his daughter was treated properly by her in-laws for 8-10 months, but thereafter they started maltreating her. In fact the father-in-law of his daughter had purchased a bus, which was later on given to his son-in-law, Pawan Kumar. Thereafter, a dispute arose between them and Pawan Kumar and that Pawan Kumar used to blame Kiran Bala for the said dispute. Accused persons used to say that after the marriage of deceased the dispute had arisen in the family and as such, she has brought bad luck to the family. Accused persons, that is husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law had stopped talking with her. The deceased had come to meet him on 25.1.2008, and thereafter, she left for her matrimonial house on 27.1.2008. While going back, she disclosed to him that she was being maltreated by accused persons and she also told that accused Shashi Bhushan had an illicit relation with one lady and due to this reason, she was being harassed by the accused persons. On this, he assured her that he would pay a visit to her matrimonial house and would talk to her in-laws regarding this problem within a week. On 3.02.2008 at 2.52 a.m. Tarlok Chand, father-in-law of deceased informed him telephonically that his daughter, Kiran Bala had committed suicide by hanging herself. On this, he assured her that he would pay a visit to her matrimonial house and would talk to her in-laws regarding this problem within a week. On 3.02.2008 at 2.52 a.m. Tarlok Chand, father-in-law of deceased informed him telephonically that his daughter, Kiran Bala had committed suicide by hanging herself. On this, he informed his relatives and thereafter went to the matrimonial house of the deceased where they reached at about 6 a.m. On reaching there, he saw that that dead body of Kiran Bala was lying on the bed and her head was in the lap of accused Kanta Devi and accused Shashi Bhushan had put his hand around the neck of the deceased. At that time, he noticed some yellow fluid coming out of the mouth of the deceased, which accused Kanta Devi wiping. He also noticed semi circular blackish injury on the neck extending from one ear to another. Apart from it, he also noticed bluish thing on both sides of the back. After observing these things, he raised a suspicion that either his daughter had been killed by accused persons or she had committed suicide due to maltreatment given to her by her in-laws. Thereafter, his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Ex.PW6/A was recorded by the police which bears signatures. On 7.02.2008, he remained associated in the investigation of this case. On the asking of the police, he handed over a note book of his daughter Kiran Bala to the police. 12. This note book was showing the handwriting and signature of deceased Kiran Bala. Seizure memo Ex.PW3/A was prepared, which bears his signatures. However, he has stated that copy Ex.P-1 and Ex.P-2 were not taken into possession by the police vide seizure memo Ex.PW3/A. This witness was declared hostile on the request of learned Public Prosecutor for the state as he has resiled from his previous statement. Prayer was considered and the same allowed. In his cross-examination, conducted by the learned Public Prosecutor for the State, he had admitted that memo Ex.PW3/A was prepared in his presence and he had tallied the page number and their description before signing the same. He had denied that Ex.P2 is the same copy, which was taken into possession by the police vide memo Ex.PW3/A. He has admitted that description of page number given in Ext. PW3/A tallied correctly with Ex.P2. He had denied that Ex.P2 is the same copy, which was taken into possession by the police vide memo Ex.PW3/A. He has admitted that description of page number given in Ext. PW3/A tallied correctly with Ex.P2. He has admitted that the copy Ext.P2 was taken into possession by the police in the presence of witnesses Basant Singh and Kishori Lal, who signed the seizure memo Ext.PW3/A in his presence. He has shown his ignorance whether Ex.P2 contains the handwriting of his daughter or not. He denied that Ext.P2 is the same copy, which had been taken into possession by the police vide memo Ex.PW3/A. In cross-examination, he stated that his statement was recorded by the police on 1.07.2008, while copy Ext.P2 was taken into possession by the police. He has shown his ignorance whether his daughter did I.T.I. in the year 2002-2003 and her Roll No. was 874. She has done two courses of cutting, tailoring and embroidery. 13. He did not see his daughter while reading and writing in his presence. He has denied that he told the police that he was producing the notebooks of his daughter Kiran Bala written by her in her own handwriting. He was confronted with portion ‘A’ to ‘A’ of statement mark ‘DB’ wherein this fact is so recorded. He also denied that copies produced by him and that which were sealed in cloth parcel with seal impression “H” and also handed over to Kishori Lal after preserving its sample on the piece of cloth were the same. Confronted with portion ‘B’ to ‘B’ of his statement mark DB, wherein this fact is so recorded. When he saw dead body of his daughter, his first impression was that she had been murdered. Initially, he got perplexed due to shock. He consulted his relatives and tried to inform Police Station Bangana about the occurrence. No one responded to the telephonic call made by him. Thereafter, somebody gave him the telephone number of Dy.S.P. Sh. Diwakar Sharma. He contacted him on mobile phone. Sh. Diwakar Sharma was on leave on that date and then he informed Addl. Superintendent of Police Sh. Madhu Sudan, who along with the police team and photographer, reached on the spot immediately. He has denied that accused persons were implicated falsely in this case. Diwakar Sharma. He contacted him on mobile phone. Sh. Diwakar Sharma was on leave on that date and then he informed Addl. Superintendent of Police Sh. Madhu Sudan, who along with the police team and photographer, reached on the spot immediately. He has denied that accused persons were implicated falsely in this case. He has further stated that he had told the police about the maltreatment meted out to her by her in-laws on 27.1.2008. Confronted with statement Ex. PW6/A, wherein it is not so recorded. His daughter did not disclose to him the fact of maltreatment before 27.1.2008. He has shown his ignorance whether the in-laws of his daughter had opened the F.D.R. in her name. He has denied that his daughter remained ill for quite a long time. He has specifically denied that his daughter was patient of depression and was under medical treatment from private doctor, namely Dr. Jagdishwar Kanwar at Una. He did not know whether deceased had written a suicide note. He has also stated that the deceased was also known as Sonu. He denied that his daughter committed suicide. 14. PW-10, Satish Kumar, deposed that in the year 2008, he was President of Gram Panchayat, Bassi. He remained associated during the investigation of this case. On 3.2.2008, police took into possession one Dupatta, which was red in colour on the corner and yellow from the middle. This was wrapped in the cloth parcel, which was sealed with seal impression ‘A’. Seizure memo Ex.PW10/A was prepared by the Investigating Officer, which bears his signatures at Point-B. A sealed parcel with three seals of F.S.L. was ordered to be opened in the Court from which one Dupatta red and yellow was found, which is Ex.PW10/A. On the same day, the police took into possession one Shirt and Salwar of dark pink colour. He identified shirt Ex.P4 and Salwar Ex.P5, which had been taken into possession by the police vide memo Ex.PW10/B. Police had also taken into possession, in his presence, 13 bangles, out of which, 10 were in read colour and two were in white colour. One bangle was broken, which was in red colour and lying on the stairs leading to the room. These bangles were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW10/C. The bangles were thereafter sealed in a cloth parcel. From the same packet, bangles Ex.P6 to P18 were taken out. One bangle was broken, which was in red colour and lying on the stairs leading to the room. These bangles were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW10/C. The bangles were thereafter sealed in a cloth parcel. From the same packet, bangles Ex.P6 to P18 were taken out. He identified those bangles. These bangles are the same, which had been taken into possession by the I.O. vide memo Ex.PW10/C, which bears his signatures at point-A. 15. On the same day, police took into possession the suicide note and ball pen red in colour, which were taken into possession by the police vide memo Ex.PW10/B, which also bears his signature. He identified suicide note Ex.PW10/E, which was same and which was taken into possession by the I.O. vide seizure memo Ex.PW10/D. The suicide note and ball pen were sealed in a cloth parcel having the seal impression ‘A’. After sealing of the parcel mentioned above, sample seal were taken on separate piece of cloth which is Ex.PW10/E. In his cross-examination, he has stated that he reached at the place of occurrence at about 12.30 p.m. At that time, there were about 18-20 persons present. He has denied that the father of the deceased read the suicide note Ex.PW10/E and thereafter stated that he does not want to take any action. 16. PW-11 Sunita Devi stated that she was knew Kiran Bala the deceased. She was married on 10.12.2006 with accused Shashi Bhushan. Before two days of the death of the deceased Kiran Bala, she narrated that her in-laws used to maltreat her by making satirical remarks. Deceased Kiran Bala used to meet her very rarely after her marriage as her house was situated away from hers house. This witness was declared hostile on the request of learned Public Prosecutor for the State as she has resiled from her previous statement. In her cross-examination, she has stated that she was mediator in the marriage between deceased and the accused Sashi Bhushan. 17. She has further stated that the mother of the accused used to pursued her for this marriage. The family of the accused was having a bus before this marriage. However, after the marriage, the father of the accused gave the said bus to his son-in-law Pawan Kumar. After this, there used to be a quarrel in the family of the accused. The family of the accused was having a bus before this marriage. However, after the marriage, the father of the accused gave the said bus to his son-in-law Pawan Kumar. After this, there used to be a quarrel in the family of the accused. She has admitted that family members of the accused used to blame deceased Kiran Bala for brining bad luck to the family of the accused. She has further stated that Kiran Bala used to tell her that she was under mental agony due to the behavior of the accused persons. Whenever Kiran Bala used to meet her, she used to complaint about the bad behavior of and ill-treatment meted out to her by the accused persons. In her cross-examination, she has stated that she did not make any complaint about the maltreatment to anybody. She has shown ignorance whether Kiran Bala was under treatment from Dr. Jagdishwar Kanwar at Una town and PGI Chandigarh. 18. PW-12, Roshan Lal, Vegetable Seller, stated that on 25.1.2008, at about 5.00 p.m. Kiran Bala met him in his shop and told that she was being maltreated by her in-laws and also was beaten up by them. She also told him that the accused persons were demanding Rs.1,00,000/- from her in order to purchase a bus. She remained in her parental house for 203 days and thereafter went back to her matrimonial house. In his cross-examination, he has stated that he did not narrate to anybody the incident told to him by Kiran Bala. He has admitted that police joined him in the investigation of this case while recovering Duptta, clothes, bangles and suicide note of deceased vide seizure memos Exts. PW-10/A to PW-10/D. All these documents bear his signatures. 19. PW-13 Dr. Gian Thakur, Assistant Director State Forensic Science Laboratory, Junga stated that on 12.02.2008, he conducted the biological analysis to detect the presence of blood in torn shirt and salwar received by FSL in a sealed packet. Nothing was found on the shirt and Salwar Exts. P4 and P5. He issued report Ex.PW13/A which bears his signatures. He also brought on record reports Exts.PW13/B to PW13/D issued by Forensic Science Laboratory Junga, H.P. 20. PW-14 Anup Kumari, the younger sister of Kiran Bala, stated that on 13.1.2008, Kiran Bala had visited her house during Lohri. On that night, she and her sister had slept in one room. He issued report Ex.PW13/A which bears his signatures. He also brought on record reports Exts.PW13/B to PW13/D issued by Forensic Science Laboratory Junga, H.P. 20. PW-14 Anup Kumari, the younger sister of Kiran Bala, stated that on 13.1.2008, Kiran Bala had visited her house during Lohri. On that night, she and her sister had slept in one room. Kiran Bala told her that her in-laws were maltreating her and were demanding Rs.1,00,000/- as they had to purchase a bus. She also told that accused Shashi Bhushan had illicit relations with a lady and that he used to frequently talk with that lady on telephone. On this account, the accused persons used to quarrel with deceased Kiran Bala and used to give her beatings. In her cross-examination, she has admitted that her sister underwent two years course in I.T.I. in the trade of cutting, tailoring and embroidery. Note book Ex.P1 may be of her sister. She has, however, denied that Exts. P1 and P2 contain the writing of her sister. She has further admitted that during her stay in the house of her sister, she used to remain in pensive mood. She has denied that her sister was in mental tension. 21. PW-15 Kamal Kishore, Photographer stated that on 3.02.2008, on the asking of police, he had taken photographers of deceased Kiran Bala, which are Exts. PW15/A-1 to PW15/A-7 and negatives of which are Exts. PW15/A-8 to PW15/8-14 and handed over the same to the police. PW-16, SI Sher Singh, has only prepared the challan after completion of investigation and presented the same in the Court. 22. PW-17, Sh. Kaur Chand, was posted as ASI Police Station, Bangana in the month of Febraury, 2008. He has stated that on 3.2.2008, a telephonic message was received from Ramesh Kumar about the death of his daughter in her in-laws house and that information was record in daily diary Ex.PW17/A. On this information, he, along with police officials, went to the spot in Government vehicle. After reaching the spot, he recorded that statement of Ramesh Kumar Ex.PW6/A under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, he sent ruqua to the Police Station for registration of F.I.R., upon which, F.I.R. Ex.PW6/D was recorded. This witness has stated that he got prepared the photographs. He also prepared inquest reports Exts. After reaching the spot, he recorded that statement of Ramesh Kumar Ex.PW6/A under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, he sent ruqua to the Police Station for registration of F.I.R., upon which, F.I.R. Ex.PW6/D was recorded. This witness has stated that he got prepared the photographs. He also prepared inquest reports Exts. PW4/B and PW4/C. He further stated that he also moved an application Ex.PW4/A for conducing the post-mortem of deceased and procured the post-mortem report Ex.PW4/F. He also prepared site plan EX.PW17/B. He also took into possession Dupatta Ex.P3 vide memo Ex.PW10/A, Shirt Ex. P-4 and Salwar Ex.P5 vide memo Ex.PW10/B, bangles Ex.P6 to P18 vide memo Ex.PW10/C, suicide note Ex.PW10/E, vide memo Ex.PW10/D, practical notebook Ex.P1 vide memo Ex.PW1/A, copy of Ex.P2 vide memo Ex.PW3/A. He also arrested the accused and recorded the statements of the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. 23. The prosecution has tried to establish on record that the suicide note Ex.PW10/E, reported to be written by Smt. Kiran Bala alias Sonu, has not been proved on record, to have been written by the said lady. However, the perusal of suicide note Ex.PW10/E and the writing contained in practical notebook Ex.P1 and diary Ex.P2 clearly proves on record that the practical notebook Ex.P1 and diary Ex.P2, belonging to deceased were taken into possession by the Investigating Officer during the investigation of this case. Ex.PW10/E and the writing contained in practical notebook Ex.P1 and diary Ex.P2 were compared by the Forensic Expert. In her report, Dr. Meenakshi Mahajan, Assistant Director, Document & Photo Division, State F.S.L., Junga has opined that the blue enclosed writing stamped and marked as A-1 to A-95 and red enclosed writing similarly stamped and marked as Q.I, all have been written by one and the same person. PW9, Ramesh Kumar, father of the deceased Kiran Bala, in his cross-examination has denied that Ex.P2 diary is the same, which was taken into possession by the police vide memo Ex. PW3/A. He has further admitted that description of page number given in Ex.PW3/A tallies correctly with Ex.P2. He has also admitted that Ex.P2 was taken into possession by the police in the presence of witnesses, namely Basant Singh and Kishori Lal, who signed the said memo in his presence. He has shown his ignorance whether Ex.P2 contains the signatures of his daughter or not. He has also admitted that Ex.P2 was taken into possession by the police in the presence of witnesses, namely Basant Singh and Kishori Lal, who signed the said memo in his presence. He has shown his ignorance whether Ex.P2 contains the signatures of his daughter or not. PW 14 Anup Kumari, the sister of Kiran Bala deceased, in her cross-examination has stated that her sister underwent two years course from I.T.I. in Cutting, Tailoring and Embroidery. Notebook Ex.P1 may be of her sister. She showed her ignorance whether notebook Ex.P2 may be of her sister. Both of these witnesses, who are the near relatives of the deceased have tried to evade the fact that Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 are the practical notebook or diary belonging to the deceased Kiran Bala and containing her handwriting. However, even they have not specifically denied the contents and handwriting of aforesaid documents. Neither the seizure memos prepared by the police while taking into possession the aforesaid documentary evidence could be repudiated by the prosecution. Even otherwise also, the scientific expert has opined in her report, as already mentioned above, that handwriting contained in suicide note Ex.PW10/E and that practical note book Ex.P1 and diary Ex.P2 are of one and the same person. Therefore, this Court has no hesitation to arrive at a conclusion that suicide note Ex.PW10/E is written and signed by the deceased Kiran Bala alias Sonu. It cannot be concluded that Kiran Bala deceased was forced to commit suicide by hanging herself due to mental and physical harassment, which was given by the accused persons. 24. Further, there may be some other reasons which led Kiran Bala to commit suicide. One of those reasons may be that husband of the deceased Kiran Bala was allegedly having illicit relations with some other lady who once visited their house and that accused Shashi Bhushan used to frequently talk with her on telephone. On this account, the accused persons used to quarrel with deceased and at times, she was also beaten up. This fact is stated by PW4, Anup Kumari, sister of the deceased during her cross-examination. No doubt, there is no evidence on record regarding the alleged mental ailment of Kiran Bala, but PW14, who was her sister, Anup Kumari has stated that her sister used to remain in a pensive mood. This fact is stated by PW4, Anup Kumari, sister of the deceased during her cross-examination. No doubt, there is no evidence on record regarding the alleged mental ailment of Kiran Bala, but PW14, who was her sister, Anup Kumari has stated that her sister used to remain in a pensive mood. Thus, it cannot be even ruled out that due to some mental stress or tension, not necessarily given by the accused persons, Kiran Bala, the deceased, might have committed suicide. There may be some other reasons like as the matter was not reported by the father of the deceased or by the deceased before the Police with regard to the harassment given by her in-laws, as stated by the father of the deceased, PW9, Ramesh Kumar, in the Court. So, considering this fact, it cannot be held that the harassment has led to the deceased to commit suicide. Therefore, as there was no reliable, cogent and convincing evidence on record to held the accused guilty of forcing the deceased to commit suicide, which is also clear from the suicide note on record. So, the Court below has not committed any illegality in passing the order for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. 25. Now, we have to analyze the statement of PW9, Ramesh Kumar and PW14, Anup Kumari, as they both have stated about the torture given to the deceased by the accused persons in her matrimonial house. As per them, the accused persons demanded One lac rupees from the deceased Kiran Bala to be taken from her father so that the accused could purchase a new bus. PW9, Ramesh Kumar, in his statement has stated that accused persons used to taunt Kiran Bala with satirical remarks that she had brought bad luck to their family. They had even stopped talking with her. Their statements are being corroborated by PW5, Rulia Ram. He has also stated that Kiran Bala told him that she was being harassed by the accused persons, mentally and physically and that they were demanding One lac rupees from her. PW11, Sunita Devi, has also deposed that deceased Kiran Bala used to tell her that her in-laws used to maltreat her and also gave satirical remarks. He has also stated that Kiran Bala told him that she was being harassed by the accused persons, mentally and physically and that they were demanding One lac rupees from her. PW11, Sunita Devi, has also deposed that deceased Kiran Bala used to tell her that her in-laws used to maltreat her and also gave satirical remarks. PW12 Roshan Lal has also deposed that Smt. Kiran Bala deceased, on 25.1.2008 at about 5.00 p.m. told him that she was being harassed by the accused persons and that they were rupees One lac rupees from her as they wanted to purchase a bus. The statements of Ramesh Kumar, father of the deceased, and Anup Kumari, sister of the deceased, are thus corroborated by other independent witnesses produced by the prosecution in material particulars. There is no material on record to discard the statements of aforesaid witnesses. Furthermore, the police officials examined by the prosecution, that is, PW1 Purshaotam Lal, PW2 Pawan Kumar and PW3 Basant Singh have also corroborated the prosecution case. 26. From this evidence, it is clear that the prosecution has been able to prove the offence committed by the accused persons under Section 498-A IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The demand of One lac rupees from the deceased for asking her to talk to her parents for this money by the accused was an illegal demand causing mental torture to Kiran Bala the deceased by the accused Shashi Bhushan for purchasing a new bus as also the harassment to the deceased by the other accused persons mentally and physically, because of the relations of the accused Shashi Bhushan with some other lady also amounts to another cruelty. 27. As discussed hereinabove, the judgment passed by the trial Court acquitting the accused persons under Section 306 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and convicting the accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC read with Section 34 IPC, is just and reasoned and after appreciating the evidence on record, the same needs no interference by this Court. Further, the death has taken place within seven years of the marriage of the deceased with accused Shashi Bhushan. 28. Further, the death has taken place within seven years of the marriage of the deceased with accused Shashi Bhushan. 28. The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the order of the Court below giving the accused persons the benefit of Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act is against the law, as two criminal cases were registered against convict Shashi Bhushan bearing FIR No.4/08, dated 3.1.2008, under Sections 341, 323 IPC, at Police Station, Hamirpur and FIR No.176/09, dated 29.11.2009, under Section 279, 338 IPC at Police Station, Amb and other convicts also had committed such crime, that they were not required to be released after granting them the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents/accused Nos.1 to 3 has argued that his clients have no previous criminal record and they are law-abiding citizens, so, benefit has rightly been granted to them. 29. Heard. 30. In order to give benefit to a convict under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, the following conditions must be fulfilled: “(1) There must not be any previous convictions; and; (2) the offender should be found guilty of having committed one of the following offences: (a) theft (Sec.379 of the Indian Penal Code): (b) theft in dwelling houses, etc. (Sec. 380 of the Indian Penal Code); (c) theft by clerk or servant of property in possession of master (Sec. 381 of the Indian Penal Code); (d) dishonest misappropriation (Sec.404 of the Indian Penal Code); (e) cheating (Sec. 420 of the Indian Penal Code); (f) any offence punishable with imprisonment for not more than two years or with fine or with both under the Indian Penal Code or any other law. Apart from the above, the Court must be of the opinion that having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender it is expedient to give him the benefit of the provisions of Sec. 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.” 31. In the present case, the two cases were registered against the convict Shashi Bhushan bearing FIR No.4/08, dated 3.1.2008, under Section 341, 323 IPC at Police Station, Hamirpur, H.P. and FIR No.176/09, dated 29.11.2009, under Section 279, 338 IPC at Police Station, Amb, District Una. In the present case, the two cases were registered against the convict Shashi Bhushan bearing FIR No.4/08, dated 3.1.2008, under Section 341, 323 IPC at Police Station, Hamirpur, H.P. and FIR No.176/09, dated 29.11.2009, under Section 279, 338 IPC at Police Station, Amb, District Una. He was acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge, Una, in an Appeal filed by the convict in case FIR No.4/08, dated 3.1.2008. However, the case under Section 279, 338 IPC was pending. Taking into consideration the overall circumstances of the present case, this Court finds that having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of offence and the character of the offender, it is not expedient to give benefit of the provisions of Sections 3 & 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act to convict Shashi Bhushan. So, the order/judgment of the Court below granting the convict Shashi Bhushan the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act is quashed. The appeal of the appellant is allowed to this extent. 32. As the judgment of the Court below to the extent of granting benefit of Sections 3 & 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act to the convict Shashi Bhushan is quashed, So, the accused Shashi Bhushan is required to be heard on quantum of sentence for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC read with Section 34 IPC. Let the accused be produced before this Court on 13th July, 2016 by issuing a production warrant.