JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.—

1. By the impugned judgment the conviction of the appellant who faced trial for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC) was upheld though sentence in respect of appellant no.2 was reduced. While the trial court had imposed sentence of imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs.3000/- each with default stipulation, the High Court by the impugned judgment maintained sentence so far as appellant no.1 but reduced the sentence so far as appellant no.2 is concerned.

2. It is to be noted that the two cases were disposed of by the common judgment. Criminal appeal no.819 SB/86 was filed by the accused-appellants while Criminal revision no.441/87 was filed by the informant questioning correctness of acquittal of co-accused Gurdev Singh.

3. Background facts as unfolded during trial are as follows:

Pirthipal Singh (PW-9) father or Smt. Devinderjit Kaur (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) alleged in the complaint filed before the police that he is resident of village Burail. He had one son, namely, Kulquant Singh and one daughter i.e. the deceased. Deceased was married with Randhir Singh (Accused-appellant no.1). From this wedlock two sons, namely, Balraj Singh and Ranpreet Singh were born. The complainant alleged that at the time of engagement of his daughter one bangle (Kara) weighing 3 Tolas, one ring weighing one Tola and Rs.501/- in cash were given to Shri Randhir Singh appellant. Gold Jewellery weighing 20 Tolas, T.V., Bajaj Chetak Scooter costing Rs.13,000/-, one Godrej Almirah, furniture and utensils etc. were given to his daughter, the deceased and son-in-law accused Randhir Singh on the day of marriage. Gurdev Singh, father of Randhir Singh, Smt. Narhbai Kaur (appellant no.2), mother of Randhir Singh, and Randhir Singh appellant had started abusing his daughter from the very beginning after the marriage on the the pretext that she should bring more money from the house of her parents. The complainant used to assure his daughter that he would meet the demand of the accused subject to the availability of the funds. The complainant received a sum of Rs.16,000/- by way of compensation as the share of his land in the year 1982. Randhir Singh (appellant no.1) compelled the deceased to bring the money, threatening that either she should bring the money from her parents, otherwise he would arrange a second marriage. Deceased came to village Burail and narrated this story to her father Prithipal Singh, her mother Smt. Gurjit Kaur (PW-12) and her uncle Shri Bhopal Singh. She further told her parents that her husband only used to pay her bus fare from salary. Appellants had sent her in order to bring Rs.15,000/- and have also warned her that if she did not bring the money dire consequences would follow. Upon this the complainant made a payment of Rs.5,000/- to his daughter and assured her that the remaining amount would be paid thereafter. After sometime, the complainant and his wife came to the house of Randhir Singh in order to see their daughter, the deceased at Kharar. When theyentered the house, they saw accused-appellant Randhir Singh and Smt. Nirbhai Kaur giving taunts to the deceased to bring more money. The complainant and his wife made them understand that they were poor persons and assured them that they would pay more money on receipt of second instalment of compensation. Then the complainant received Rs.22,000/- as cost of the acquired land and he and his wife came to Kharar along with a sum of Rs.5,000/- and gave it to the deceased. The accused told the complainant to pay at least Rs.20,000/- so that their daughter may live comfortably. upon this the complainant told them that they were poor persons and they were not in a position to pay the huge money. On 3.2.1985 the deceased again went to the house of her parents in village Burail and told them that accused-appellant Randhir Singh and Smt. Narbhai Kaur ha