SHARMA, J. - (1.) THIS criminal appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 25. 8. 2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Kishangarhbas, Alwar, thereby convicting the accused appellants under Sections 304-B and 201 IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years on first count and 3 years on second count with a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default thereof, each was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) THE facts of the prosecution case giving rise to this appeal are summarised as below : On 27. 1. 1999, complainant Sukhan lodged a written report, Ex. P14 at Police Station, Tapukada about the incident alleged to have taken place on 23. 1. 99. It was alleged in the report that his daughter Santo, aged 24 years, since deceased, was married to accused appellant Jagdish on 3. 3. 95 and since then, she had been subjected to mal-treatment, harassment and cruelty on the ground of demand of dowry by her husband Jagdish and his family members and also turned her out from their house on various occasions. It was alleged that on 23. 1. 99, the accused killed her by applying electric current and buried her in their house. As per the allegation, her body was taken out from the pit on 25. 1. 99 and cremated in a Nala. The complainant alleged that at the time of her murder, she had pregnancy of 6-7 months. On this written report, police registered a case vide FIR, Ex. P. 15 and proceeded with investigation. During investigation, police recorded the statements of witnesses u/sec. 161 Cr. P. C. , prepared the site plan, Ex. P. 17 of the crematorium, the place where the deceased was burnt, seized the soil from the pit vide seizure memo Ex. P. 18, recovered a piece of green coloured bangle made of glass, a piece of red coloured bangle, one used old sock (Jurab) of one foot, a iron wire and a electric wire of yellow and blue colour of the length of 9 feet from the pit and prepared seizure memo Ex. P. 19 and also seized burnt and half burnt bones and ashes vide memo Ex. P. 20. The police arrested accused Jagdish, Ram Prasad and Smt. Bhoti vide arrest memos Ex. P. 16, P. 22 and P. 23. On the information of accused Jagdish, the police recovered a chain and silver `paijeb' of the deceased. A pair of earring of the deceased was also recovered on the information and at the instance of accused Jagdish vide memo Ex. P. 12. The police also prepared memos, Ex. P. 24 and Ex. P. 25 of the place pointed out by accused Jagdish and Bhoti, where deceased was buried, on the information having been furnished by accused Jagdish Prasad and Smt. Bhoti, Vide memo, Ex. P. 26, accused Jagdish pointed out the place where the deceased was burnt and Vide memo, Ex. P. 27 accused Ram Prasad pointed out the place of pit and crematorium. On completion of usual investigation, the police submitted a charge sheet against the accused appellants in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Tijara. The learned Magistrate, having found the case exclusively triable by a Court of Sessions, committed the case to the learned Sessions Judge, who in turn, transferred the case for trial to the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Tract), Kishangarhbas. The learned trial court on the basis of evidence and material collected during investigation and after hearing arguments of both the side, framed charges against the accused appellants under Sections 304-B and 201 IPC. The accused denied the charges and claimed trial.
(3.) DURING trial, the prosecution examined as many as 20 witnesses and exhibited some documents to prove its case. Thereafter, the accused were examined u/sec. 313 Cr. P. C. The accused did not examine any witnesses in their defence. At the conclusion of trial, the trial court found the prosecution case as alleged, proved and accordingly convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforesaid. Hence the present appeal. In order to establish the charges, the prosecution has relied upon the following evidence : (i) the extra judicial confession made by accused Jagdish on 25. 1. 1999 at 8-9 PM before witnesses Prakash, Tara Chand, Shibbu and Manohar to the effect that he buried his wife in the house: (ii) to prove that the deceased was subjected to harassment/cruelty on account of demand of dowry, the prosecution has relied upon the statements of Ramjan, Isal & Abdullah, neighbours of the accused, Smt. Shakuntala, mother of deceased, Shanker, Phupha of deceased, Om Prakash and Chunnilal, cousin brothers of complainant Sukkan, Raghuvir, cousin brother of deceased and Sukkan, father of the deceased; (iii) recovery of chain and `paijeb' of deceased vide recovery memo Ex. P. 29 on the information Ex. P. 33 dated 6. 2. 99 of accused Jagdish; (iv) recovery of ear rings of deceased on the information, Ex. P32 dated 8. 2. 99 of accused Jagdish, vide recovery memo Ex. P. 12 and its site plan, Ex. P. 13; (v) recovery of iron wire vide memo Ex. P. 28 and its its site plan Ex. P. 21, on the information, Ex. P. 34 dated 6. 2. 99 of accused Jagdish; (vi) Information of accused Ram Prasad about the pit and crematorium, Ex. P. 31 dated 30. 1. 99 and his pointing out the places vide memo Ex. P. 27; (vii) Accused Jagdish furnished information about the pit and crematorium vide memo Ex. P. 35 dated 6. 2. 99 and he also pointed out the places vide memos Ex. P. 24 and P. 26; (viii) Accused Smt. Bhoti furnished information about pit where deceased was buried (Ex. P. 30 dated 30. 1. 99) and she pointed out the place vide memo Ex. P. 25. (ix) Site plan, Ex. P. 16 dated 29. 1. 99 of the house of accused, seizure memo of soil of pit and control soil vide memo Ex. P. 18 dated 29. 1. 99, seizure memo of iron wire, two pieces of broken glass bangles, one sock from the pit and one electric wire lying near the wall, seizure memo of ashes, burnt and half burnt bones and one half burnt hand with fingers having ring of the deceased from crenatiriumo, vide memo Ex. P. 20 dated 29. 1. 1999 and its site plan Ex. P. 17. At the very out set, it may be mentioned the there is no direct evidence to the effect that the accused appellants pushed the deceased in a pit and passed electric current in it so as to cause her death and after her death covered the pit with soil and thereafter removed her dead body and put it on fire. To prove this fact, the prosecution has relied upon the circumstances enumerated above. In this view of the matter, I shall now deal with the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution, in the light of the evidence, oral as well as documentary. ;