The present appellants, who are convicted by the learned Sessions Court for the offences punishable u/s. 304B r/w. 34 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- each, in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment of 6 months each, have challenged the said conviction and sentence. Besides the above conviction and sentence, they were also convicted for the offence punishable u/s. 498A r/w. 34 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of 3 years each and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- each, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 6 months each. However, the sentence imposed was directed to run concurrently with the major punishment.

2. The appellants are son and mother respectively. They were charge sheeted for the offence punishable u/s. 302 r/w. 34 of the IPC as well as u/s. 304 r/w. 34 of the IPC and u/s. 428 r/w. 34 of the IPC on the following allegations:

That deceased Sonali was married to appellant no. 1 Sachin before 3 months of her unfortunate death. The date of marriage is 11/11/2011. After marriage, she started cohabiting at the house of present appellants. The father in law Mahadev was also residing with them. Initially for a period of about 1 month, deceased Sonali was treated well by the accused. However, thereafter both the respondents/accused started ill-treating her on account of demand of remaining amount of Rs.50,000/- that was settled in the marriage. They also used to nag her on the count that the parental relatives of the deceased did not celebrate the marriage as per the status of the respondents. Further nagging was on the count that the deceased was not well versed in cooking or daily work of the house. They also used to say that the brother of the deceased had offered his daughter for marriage with appellant no. 1 and was also offering 5 tolas of gold in the marriage. In the circumstances, these appellants used to abuse and beat the deceased. Deceased however continued to reside with the appellants. As and when deceased Sonali used to visit her parental house or as and when the parental relatives used to visit her, at that time, she used to narrate about the said ill-treatment. The parental relatives, however, used to prevail over her and asked her to cohabit with the appellants by telling her that they would find a solution. Thereafter the parental relatives even tried to prevail over the present appellants by telling them that the deceased should not be ill-treated. However, the ill-treatment was continued. Even a meeting was arranged at the house of the appellants, wherein the mother i.e. P.W.No.2 Nanda, her husband Baban, their son Ashok, P.W.No.3 Rajendra and Sahebrao had participated. In the said meeting, at attempt was made to prevail over the appellants. Thereafter also the ill-treatment was continued. Later on the present appellants started demanding an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- through deceased Sonali for the purpose of construction of the house and on that count also the ill-treatment was continued. In the circumstances, on 13/02/2013, at about 10.00 in the night, P.W.No.2 Rajendra i.e. brother of the deceased made a phone call from his coin box to deceased Sonali in order to inquire about her. At that time, deceased Sonali told him that both the appellants continued to ill-treat her over the demand of remaining settled amount in the marriage of Rs.50,000/-. She further repeated the reasons of nagging and the fresh demand of Rs.1,00,000/- for construction of house. She also told that the ill-treatment was continued on this count. Thereafter deceased Sonali disconnected the telephone.

3. In this situation, the incident occurred on 14/02/2012. P.W.No.2 Nanda filed a report at Exh.20. She has further reported that on that day, at about 6.30 a.m. in the morning, appellant no. 1 Sachin made a phone call and told that at about 4.00 a.m. in the morning, deceased Sonali had left the house