JUDGMENT : S.N. AGNIHOTRI, J. 1. Appellant Sharif Khan and Smt. Bano Begum have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, District Farrukhabad passed on 13.6.2003 in Sessions Trial No. 352 of 2001 arising out of Crime No. 75 of 2001, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S Rajepur, District Farrukhabad whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge held both appellants guilty under section 304-B I.P.C. and sentenced them with life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5000/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment of one year. They were also held guilty under Section 498-A I.P.C. and punished with three year's rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to serve additional six months simple imprisonment. Under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act one year rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 1000/- fine with default stipulation was imposed. All punishment were to run concurrently. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that complainant Shri Latif Khan, resident of Village Amtara, Police Station Pachdevra, District Hardoi, married his daughter Smt. Shamshida Begum with accused Shri Sharif Khan about two years prior from the date of her death. Accused Sharif Khan husband and Smt. Bano Begum mother-in-law of the deceased Smt. Shamshida Begum were not satisfied with the dowry which was given by the complainant. Both accused started demanding additional dowry including double bed, deg, utensils of brass/bronze, cycle and Rs. 10,000/- in cash after one year of the marriage. Allegation is that demand of dowry was not met by the complainant that is why accused persons murdered his daughter. The information was given to complainant by the police. There upon he came to the Village of the accused persons Garhia Jasupur, P.S Rajepur, District Farrukhabad where he found that his daughter had been murdered by the accused persons through strangulation on 25.6.2001. 3. Complainant got scribed the report Exhibit Ka-1 from one Shri Mohammad Ali s/o Mohammad Saddiq, resident of Daulatpur Chakai, P.S Rajepur, District Farrukhabad and lodged as F.I.R. at P.S. Rajepur, District Farrukhabad. 4. Inquest report was prepared by Tehsildar Shri Sukh Ram with the help of Shri Avinash Chandra Dikshit, Sub-inpsector on 26.6.2001 and concerned documents for post-mortem were also prepared. Body was sent for post-mortem to District Head Quarter. 4. Inquest report was prepared by Tehsildar Shri Sukh Ram with the help of Shri Avinash Chandra Dikshit, Sub-inpsector on 26.6.2001 and concerned documents for post-mortem were also prepared. Body was sent for post-mortem to District Head Quarter. Investigation of the crime was conducted by Deputy S.P. Shri S.K. Srivastava and finding sufficient evidence, submitted charge sheet. 5. Accused were charged under Sections 304-B, 498 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Accused denied charges and desired to be tried. 6. Prosecution examined as many as five prosecution witnesses (for brevity PWs) in support, which are PW-1 Shri Latif Khan complainant, PW-2 Shri Habib, PW-3 Dr. R.C. Arun, PW-4 Shri Kalicharan and PW-5 Shri S.K. Srivastava. Accused examined Defence Witness No. 1 Shri Zaheer Khan. 7. Under Section 313 Cr.P.C. accused person denied allegations, Smt. Bano Begum pleaded that her son Sharif Khan and his wife Shamshida Begum were residing separately and she herself and her husband and other children were residing separately. Her name was mentioned in F.I.R. due to enmity with co-villagers. She had no concern with this offence. 8. Appellant Sharif Khan has stated that he did not ever ask for dowry nor harassed or beaten his wife. Father of the deceased was not in a position to pay dowry. The deceased was psychiatric patient and she often used to go out of home. On the fatal day she went out of home and some unknown persons had assaulted her. Thus she suffered injuries and when she came home, she fell down and died. 9. Before entering into the merits of the case, it will be beneficial to mention the summary of the evidence adduced by both parties. 10. PW-1 Latif Khan is the complainant and father of the deceased. This witness has supported the narration enshrined in F.I.R and stated that he had married his daughter Smt. Shamshida Begum with accused Sharif Khan about two years prior from her death. Deceased Shamshida Begum had told him and neighbours etc., when she came to her parental house, that the accused persons Shri Sharif Khan and his mother Smt. Bano Begum were asking double bed, deg, brass/bronze utensils, cycle and Rs. 10,000/- cash in dowry and that they are subjecting her to cruelty on non-fullfilment of these demands. This witness had visited the nuptial home of Smt. Shamshida Begum about 8 days prior from death. 10,000/- cash in dowry and that they are subjecting her to cruelty on non-fullfilment of these demands. This witness had visited the nuptial home of Smt. Shamshida Begum about 8 days prior from death. Accused persons refused to send her with him. They also said that she would be sent on on payment of dowry otherwise they would murder his daughter. Since the complainant witness failed to satisfy demand of dowry of the accused persons, they have murdered Smt. Shamshida Begum by strangulation. 11. He has further stated that accused persons did not inform him about the incident. He was informed by the police. He visited the nuptial home of her daughter Smt. Shamshida Begum, where he found the dead body of her daughter besides whom Smt. Bano Begum was sitting. He also stated that the inquest report was prepared in his presence. 12. PW-2 Habib also supported the statement of PW-1 Latif and stated on oath that the deceased told the members of the family her plight when she came to her parental house. 13. PW-3 Dr. R.C. Arun testified that on 26.06.2001, he had performed postmortem upon the dead body of Smt. Shamshida Begum and following ante mortem injuries were found. 1. Abraided contusion 4cmx 3cm on right side face just behind outer angle of right eye 2. Abraided contusion 4cm x 2.5cm over left upper eye lid. 3. Contusion 5cm x 3.5cm on left side cheek. Involving lower eye lid. 4. Abraided contusion 7cm x 5cm over right mandibular region involving chin and upper part of neck. 5. Contusion 6cm x 4cm at the top of right shoulder. 6. Contusion 4cm x 3cm front of right thigh in middle part. 7. Contusion 4.5cm x 3cm over left claviclee region. 8. Contusion 9cm x 6cm pastes lateral aspect of chest in middle part. 9. Contusion 2cm x 1.5cm back of left elbow. 10. Abrasion 5cm x 2cm over left backfossa. 11. Contusion 10cm x 8cm right side of chest in middle part on dessectin haemalons was found. 14. Rigor mortis had passed from upper limbs and was partly present on lower limbs, face, lip, nail were bluish and reddish frothy, material was coming out of the mouth. There were small blisters upon the chest and abdomen faecal material was coming out from anus. 15. Fourth and fifth ribs of right side were broken. Pleura was congested. 14. Rigor mortis had passed from upper limbs and was partly present on lower limbs, face, lip, nail were bluish and reddish frothy, material was coming out of the mouth. There were small blisters upon the chest and abdomen faecal material was coming out from anus. 15. Fourth and fifth ribs of right side were broken. Pleura was congested. Haematoma was present in larynx and trachea. Hyoid bone was also fractured. Both lungs were congested. There were gas and liquid material in small intestine and gas and faecal material was present in large intestine. Spleen and kidneys were congested. Urinary bladder and uterus were empty. 16. In the opinion of Dr. R.C. Arun, the death occurred due to asphyxia which was caused by strangulation. Postmortem report Exhibit Ka-2 is available on record. The deceased died on 25.6.2001 due to above noted injuries. These injuries could be caused by beating and obstruction of breathing/respiration by pressing throat and fracture in hyoid bone. Injury No. 4 was sufficient to cause death. Deceased died due to fracture in hamart and hyoid bone which created obstruction in respiration. 17. PW4 Constable Sri Kali Charan is a formal witness and has stated that pursuant to the Exhibit Ka-1, he had recorded check F.I.R. Which is Exhibit Ka-3 and this fact was entered in the general diary of the Police Station Exhibit Ka-4. 18. PW5 Shailendra Kumar Srivastava, Deputy Superintendent/ Investigating Officer has stated that he had commenced investigation of the case on 26.06.2001 and recorded the statement of complainant and other witnesses, inspected the place of occurrence and prepared site plan Exhibit Ka-5. It is further stated that the inquest report Exhibit Ka-6 of the dead body of Smt. Shamshida Begum was prepared by Tehsildar Shri Sukhram with the help of Shri Avinash Chandra Dikshit, who has since retired. S.I. Shri Avinash Chandra Dixit prepared relevant documents for postmortem of the dead body which are letter to C.M.O., letter to Reserve Inspector of Police, chalan corpse, photo of corpse which are Exhibit Ka-7 to Ka-10 respectively. He submitted charge sheet Exhibit Ka-11 on conclusion of investigation. 19. DW1 Shri Jahir Khan was resident of Village Gadhiya Jasupur, P.S. Rajepur, District Farrukhabad, i.e. village of incident, who stated on oath that he was mediator in the marriage of appellant Sharif Khan and deceased Smt. Shamshida Begum. He submitted charge sheet Exhibit Ka-11 on conclusion of investigation. 19. DW1 Shri Jahir Khan was resident of Village Gadhiya Jasupur, P.S. Rajepur, District Farrukhabad, i.e. village of incident, who stated on oath that he was mediator in the marriage of appellant Sharif Khan and deceased Smt. Shamshida Begum. Smt. Shamshida Begum was mentally ill and weak that's why she used to go out of the house of appellants quite frequently. The appellants never demanded deg, utensils of brass and copper, bicycle and Rs. 10,000/- in cash from the deceased and complainant nor harassed or subjected deceased Smt. Shamshida Begum to the cruelty. He further stated that on the date of incident Smt. Shamshida Begum was lying in a trench, villagers picked her and brought her to the house of the appellants. At that time she was unconscious and after an hour she died. 20. Heard the submissions of Shri Pravindra Kumar Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Sayyed Ali Murtuza, learned A.G.A. for the State. 21. First of all, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has not provide opportunity to adduce evidence or submission regarding the punishment. In these circumstances the accused-persons be acquitted; because they were deprived of opportunity of being heard on the question of punishment. 22. The submission was rebutted by learned A.G.A., and argued that opportunity of hearing and adducing of evidence was provided to accused persons, which is clear from the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge. 23. To appreciate submissions of learned counsels, it will be just to reproduce Section 235 Cr.P.C. "235. Judgment of acquittal or conviction.- (1) After hearing arguments and points of law (if any), the Judge shall give a judgment in the case. (2) If the accused is convicted, the Judge shall, unless he proceeds in accordance with the provisions of Section 360, hear the accused on the question of sentence, and then pass sentence on him according to law." 24. In view of the rival contentions we have perused the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad dated 13.06.2003 which discloses that the opportunity of hearing and making submissions was provided as per mandate of section 235 of Cr.P.C., though Learned Additional Sessions Judge did not postpone the hearing for another day, but it can not be a ground for the acquittal. Accused persons too could have asked for adjournment or time for adducing oral or documentary evidence in their favour from the court concerned. They did not do so. We do not think that can be treated as ground for acquitted. 25. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the offence under Section 304-B I.P.C., because there is no evidence against the appellants that they had ever demanded dowry from the complainant or his daughter Smt. Shamshida Begum or she was subjected to cruelty for failure to fulfill demand of dowry. It is further submitted that the evidence tendered by the prosecution is of the general nature. 26. On the contrary learned A.G.A. has submitted that PW1 Shri Latif Khan and PW2 Shri Habib have categorically testified that after one year of the marriage both appellants started demanding the double bed, deg, utensils of brass and copper, bicycle and Rs. 10,000/- in cash in dowry. It is also proved by the prosecution that death of Smt. Shamshida Begum was unnatural and occurred within seven years of her marriage in the house of appellants. 27. To appreciate rival submission of the parties it will be just, proper and beneficial to quote paragraph 7 of the Hon'ble Apex Court's judgment reported in (2015) 9 Supreme Court Cases 588 V.K. Mishra and Another v. State of Uttrakhand and Another. "In order to attract application of Section 304-B I.P.C., the essential ingredients are as follows: 1. The death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under a normal circumstances. 2. Such a death should have occurred within seven years of her marriage." 3. She must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband. 4. Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with demand of dowry. 5. Such cruelty or harassment is shown to have been meted out to the woman soon before her death. On proof of the essential ingredients mentioned above, it becomes obligatory on the court to raise a presumption that the accused caused the dowry death. A conjoint reading of Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and Section 304-B IPC shows that there must be material to show that soon before her death the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment. On proof of the essential ingredients mentioned above, it becomes obligatory on the court to raise a presumption that the accused caused the dowry death. A conjoint reading of Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and Section 304-B IPC shows that there must be material to show that soon before her death the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment. " Soon before" is a relative term and it would depend upon circumstance of each case and no straitjacket formula can be laid down as to what would constitute a period "soon before the occurrence" There must be in existence a proximate live link between the facts of cruelty in connection with the demand of dowry and the death. If the alleged incident of cruelty is remote in time and has become stale enough not to disturb mental equilibrium of the woman concerned, it would be of no consequence." 28. In view of the above noted observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court, prosecution indisputably has succeeded to prove that Smt. Shamshida Begum died in the house of the appellants within seven years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances. PW1 Shri Latif Khan and PW2 Shri Habib have deposed that Smt. Shamshida Begum was murdered by the accused-persons by strangulation. PW3 Dr. R.C. Arun has also proved that there were 11 anti mortem injuries on the dead body of Smt. Shamshida Begum in which injury No. 4 was sufficient to cause death. Injury No. 4 is a abraided contusion 7cm x 5cm over right mandibular region involving chin and upper part of neck. As per opinion of PW3 Dr. R.C. Arun, the larings and trachea was full of clotted blood and the hamart and hyoid bone was fractured that's why the respiration was obstructed. 29. Appellant Shri Sharif Khan stated in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., that he himself or his family members neither demanded dowry nor harassed Smt. Shamshida Begum. She often used to go out of residence and on the fatal day she had gone in the night out of home and some unknown persons had assaulted her. She came back injured and fell down under the thatch of the appellant's house. She was psycho-patient. Appellants did not support his statement with any cogent and reliable evidence. There is nothing on record to suggest that Smt. Shamshida Begum was psycho-patient. She came back injured and fell down under the thatch of the appellant's house. She was psycho-patient. Appellants did not support his statement with any cogent and reliable evidence. There is nothing on record to suggest that Smt. Shamshida Begum was psycho-patient. Appellants examined DW1 Shri Zaheer Khan who stated on oath that Smt. Shamshida Begum was mentally ill and weak. On the day of her death, she had gone out for answering nature's call. There were ravines, trenches and forest near the Village. In the morning, she was found lying in a pit, villagers picked her to the house of appellants where she died. The statement of appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the statement of DW1 are contrary to each other. Thus it is unambiguous that Smt. Shamshida Begum was neither mentally ill nor weak and there is no evidence to show that she had gone out in the night from the house of the appellants for any purpose. Moreover, if the deceased Smt. Shamshida Begum was found under unconscious condition in the ravine or pit of the forest, then it was the duty of the appellants to inform the police and parents of deceased, which was not done by appellants. 30. PW1 Shri Latif Khan and PW2 Shri Habib have proved that marriage of Smt. Shamshida Begum was solemnized two years prior to the incident with appellant Shri Sharif Khan and that she died in the abnormal circumstances. It is also proved by doctor that Smt. Shamshida Begum was killed by strangulation. The statement of prosecution witnesses PW1 and PW2 is supported by post mortem report Exhibit Ka-2 and oral testimony of PW3 Dr. R.C. Arun. Thus it is proved that Smt. Shamshida Begum died on 25.06.2001 due to strangulation. Duration of marriage has not been denied by appellants as well. 31. PW1 Shri Latif Khan, complainant and father of the deceased and PW2 Shri Habib, uncle of the deceased have stated on oath that deceased Shamshida Begum had told them that appellants were demanding dowry and also subjecting her to cruelty on non-fulfillment of that demand. Both witness were cross-examined by the appellants but nothing could be extracted in favour of appellants though it is admitted by these witnesses that the financial condition of rival parties was not sound. 32. Both witness were cross-examined by the appellants but nothing could be extracted in favour of appellants though it is admitted by these witnesses that the financial condition of rival parties was not sound. 32. PW1 Shri Latif Khan and PW2 Shri Habib have testified that Smt. Shamshida Begum, whenever visited her parental home informed that the appellants were subjecting her to physical and mental cruelty due to non-fulfillment of dowry demands. This evidence was never rebutted nor any contrary fact revealed through cross-examination of these two witnesses in favour of appellants. PW1 Shri Latif Khan has also stated that he had visited the house of appellants about eight days prior from the date of death of Smt. Shamshida Begum and requested appellants to send Smt. Shamshida Begum with him but it was refused. It was also stated by this witness that appellant Sharif Khan gave beating to his daughter Smt. Shamshida Begum in his presence in Village Gadhiya Jasupur. PW2 Habib has also supported the allegation of beating of deceased by her husband on non-fulfillment of dowry demands. 33. The evidence of PW1 Shri Latif Khan and PW2 Shri Habib has proved that Smt. Shamshida Begum was married to appellant Sharif Khan two years prior from the date of incident. Appellants had demanded double bed, deg, utensils of brass and copper, bicycle and Rs. 10,000/- cash in dowry. When the demand of dowry was not satisfied, deceased was subjected to mental and physical cruelty. On the fatal day, she died due to ante-mortem injuries and strangulation. PW3 Dr. R.C. Arun proved that there were eleven injuries on body of deceased in which injury No. 4 was alone sufficient to cause death. 34. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that Smt. Shamshida Begum was mentally weak and ill and she committed suicide by hanging herself. 35. Submission of learned counsel is not in-consonance with evidence available on record. There is no evidence in the support of the submission made by learned counsel for the appellants. 34. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that Smt. Shamshida Begum was mentally weak and ill and she committed suicide by hanging herself. 35. Submission of learned counsel is not in-consonance with evidence available on record. There is no evidence in the support of the submission made by learned counsel for the appellants. We have perused the entire record and evidence tendered by the parties and found that argument of learned counsel for the appellants has no merit because as per the statement of appellant Sharif Khan, Smt. Shamshida Begum died due to injuries caused by some unknown persons in the fields or forest and then came in injured condition from the outside (forest) to the house of the appellants. As per the statement of DW1, deceased was found lying in the trench of the forest. There is no evidence that deceased Shamshida Begum committed suicide. Evidence of DW1 Jaheer Khan does not inspire confidence. 36. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that as per prosecution version deceased smt. Shamshid Begum was died on 25.06.2001 whereas the inquest report was prepared on 26.06.2001 at 12:40 p.m. Failure to explain this inordinate delay, creates doubt about the prosecution case. We do not agree with the submission of learned counsel for the appellants, because appellants have not questioned the prosecution witnesses on this point. No opportunity was given to prosecution witnesses to explain the circumstances. Moreover, record suggests that PW1 and PW2 are the resident of another Village Aamtara, District Hardoi, whereas this incident occurred in the Village Gadhiya Jasupur, which is situated in District Farrukhabad. PW1 and PW2 were informed by the police about the fact of the death of Smt. Shamshida Begum, thereupon the witnesses came to the village Gadhiya Jasupur and PW1 Shri Latif Khan submitted his application in Police Station Rajepur at about 17:55 O'clock, pursuance of which F.I.R. was recorded by PW4 Constable Shri Kalicharan. PW4 constable Shri Kalicharan and PW5 Deputy Superintendent/Investigating Officer Shri S.K. Srivasatava were also not cross-examined on this point, who were the best witnesses to explain about the delay of execution of the inquest report. 37. It is further submitted that the F.I.R. and statement of PW1 and PW2 do not disclose the time of death of Smt. Shamshida Begum that's why the statement of PW1 Shri Latif Khan and F.I.R. are not reliable. 37. It is further submitted that the F.I.R. and statement of PW1 and PW2 do not disclose the time of death of Smt. Shamshida Begum that's why the statement of PW1 Shri Latif Khan and F.I.R. are not reliable. This argument is also not tenable because Smt. Shamshida Begum died in the house of appellants. The time of death could only be disclosed by the appellants. 38. Lastly, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that appellant No. 2 Smt. Bano Begum was residing separately from appellant Sharif, therefore, to attribute any role to appellant Bano Begum in the stated murder of deceased is wrong. If demand of dowry was made after one year of marriage then Bano Begum, living separately cannot be held responsible for it. In any case allegation of cruelty can only be levelled against the husband of deceased. 39. Shri Latif Khan in his statement on oath admitted that ^^'kjhQ vkeus lkeus eka ds jgrs FksaA jkLrk chp esa FkkA [kkuk vyx curk FkkA eka jk'ku tc nsrh Fkh] rc 'kjhQ dks [kkuk cukdj nsrh FkhA 'kjhQ ds cki ftUnk gSaA 'kjhQ 5 HkkbZ gSaA ikapks HkkbZ eka cki ds ikl jgrs gSaA 'kjhQ ds NksVs HkkbZ dh 'kknh gks xbZA og cgw vc vius eSds jgrh gSA 'kjkQr Hkh llqjky esa jgrk gSA^^ 40. The above noted statement shows that appellant No. 2 Smt. Bano Begum was residing separately from the appellant Sharif Khan and the house of both appellants were separated by the public street. 41. This statement display that appellant Sharif Khan was residing separately with his wife and was doing farming as admitted by Shri Latif Khan. Evidently Smt. Bano Begum, appellant No. 2 residing separately, would not have been beneficiary of the dowry if the demand was fulfilled. PW1 and PW2 have stated on oath that when they reached at the place of incident, appellant No. 2 Smt. Bano Begum was sitting nearby the dead body of Smt. Shamshida Begum. We are of the opinion that Smt. Bano Begum cannot be held guilty of offence of dowry death of deceased. 42. We believe that husband of deceased demanded dowry from his wife and her family subsequent to his marriage with deceased. Failure of parents to satisfy them, these demand resulted in death of deceased Shamshad Begum within seven years of her marriage on account of injuries due to strangulation etc. 42. We believe that husband of deceased demanded dowry from his wife and her family subsequent to his marriage with deceased. Failure of parents to satisfy them, these demand resulted in death of deceased Shamshad Begum within seven years of her marriage on account of injuries due to strangulation etc. Evidence also shows that deceased was continuously subjected to cruelty immediately before her death on non-fulfillment of such dowry demands. 43. We also of the view that Smt. Bano Begum did not assist in killing Smt. Shamshida Begum and she cannot be held responsible for the abnormal death of deceased. 44. In view of the above discussion, it is also proved beyond reasonable doubt that appellant Sharif Khan demanded dowry from Smt. Shamshida Begum and her parents which was not fulfilled by her parents due to which appellant was subjecting Smt. Shamshida Begum to cruelty, thus the offence under Section 498A I.P.C. is proved against appellant Sharif Khan only. 45. Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 provides that if any person, after the commencement of this Act, gives or takes or abets the giving or taking of dowry, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, and with fine which shall not be less than fifteen thousands rupees or the amount of the value of such dowry, whichever is more. 46. In view of the above noted phraseology, in the case in hand, PW-1 Shri Latif Khan and PW-2 Shri Habib have stated on oath that the dowry was demanded by the appellants but it was never been paid. Thus the offence under Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act is not made out against the appellants. 47. Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 provides that if any person demands, directly or indirectly, from the parents or other relatives or guardians of a bride or bridegroom, as the case may be, any dowry, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees. 48. The above noted phraseology suggest that if any person directly or indirectly demand dowry from the bride or bride-groom, they will be punishable under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 48. The above noted phraseology suggest that if any person directly or indirectly demand dowry from the bride or bride-groom, they will be punishable under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. In the case in hand, PW-1 Shri Latif Khan and PW-2 Shri Habib have proved that appellant Sharif Khan demanded brass and copper vessels, cycle and Rs. 10,000/- in case from Smt. Shamshida Begum and her family in dowry. Appellant Sharif Khan is therefore also guilty of offence under Section 4 of D.P. Act. 49. As discussed above, we are of the opinion that the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3 is liable to be upheld against the conviction and sentence of appellant Sharif Khan, husband of the deceased, whereas liable to be allowed against the conviction and sentence of appellant Smt. Bano Begum, mother-in-law of deceased Smt. Shamshida Begum. Hence, appeal is partly allowed. Appeal of Smt. Bano Begum is allowed. She is acquitted of all offences while appeal of appellant Sharif Khan, husband of the deceased Smt. Shamshida Begum is dismissed. 50. Let this judgment be certified to the trial Court for compliance. Trial Court is directed to report compliance within one month thereafter.