S.S.GREWAL, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of Additional Section Judge, Rohtak, dated 4/6.12.1991, whereby both the appellants were convicted under Section 304 -B of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. The appellants were further convicted under Section 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. Both the substantive sentences of imprisonment awarded to each of the appellants were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) IN brief facts of the prosecution case are that marriage of Sunita (deceased) with Jaswant Singh appellant was solemnised in 1986. Both Jaswant Singh and his mother Chandrawati used to harass and beat Sunita for not bringing sufficient dowry. Jaswant Singh left Sunita at the house of her parents where she lived about a year or so. On 13.12.1989, Jaswant Singh appellant and his sister Sheela and latter's husband went and brought Sunita after giving assurance that she would not be maltreated. On 17th January, 1990, Sunita was brought to the house of her perents by her brother Krishan, as their father Suraj Mal was seriously ill and later died soon thereafter. Sunita complained to her mother that the appellants made demands of tempo and buffalo as her parents were rich and had sold land worth Rs. 4,00,000.00. On 9th February, 1990 Jaswant Singh appellant came to the parental village of Sunita and informed her brother Raj Singh that Sunita was admitted in Medical College, Rohtak as she had developed stomachache and in spite of medication her condition had not improyed. As Ram Roshni had gone to her parents house in village Phungana (U.P.) Raj Singh PW first went and brought his mother, uncle and latter's wife to Delhi. There Hari Chand another relation was joined and they went to Medical Hospital, Rohtak where they found that Sunita had died by consuming poisonous tablets. Ram Roshni mother of Sunita went and lodged the first information report with the police at Police Station, Sampla at 5.30 P.M. on 10.2.1990 which was completed by 6.30 P.M. Special report reached the llaga Magistrate at 8.15 P.M. on the same day. Post -mortem examination conducted on the dead body of Sunita on 10.2.1990 at 2.30 P.M. and the report of the Chemical Examiner concerning the viscera of deceased revealed that Sunita died due to intake of aluminium phosphide poison. After completion of their investigation both the appellants were, challaned, tried, convicted and sentenced as stated earlier.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the parties were heard. On behalf of the appellants it was submitted that there is no legal, cogent or reliable evidence on the record to prove that Sunita deceased died within seven years of her marriage. Admittedly Sunita died on 9.2.1990 at 8.10 P.M. Testimony of Ram Roshani mother of the deceased and Jaswant Singh father's sister's husband of the deceased reveals that the marriage of Sunita deceased with Jaswant Singh took place in the year 1986 or 1987. Both the accused in their statements recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure admitted that the marriage between Jaswant Singh and Sunita took place in the year 1986. All these circumstances leave no manner of doubt that the marriage of Sunita with Jaswant Singh appellant took place within seven years of the death of Sunita aforesaid. According to the testimony of PW.1 Dr. V.K. Gobila, the cause of death of Sunita was due to aluminium phosphide poisoning. Thus the prosecution has been able to prove that the unnatural death of Sunita took place due to intake of aluminium phosphide posisoning within seven years of her marriage. Since Sunita deceased was subjected to cruelty in connection with the demand for dowry by the appellants and was forced to commit suicide within seven years of her marriage, presumption under Section 113 -B of the Indian Evidence Act has rightly been drawn by the learned trial court against the appellants.;