1. The appellants (son and mother) are original accused Nos.2 and 3. They were tried along with original accused No.1 Raosaheb Ghadge, (the father of accused No.2 and husband of accused No.3), and accused No.4 Anita and accused No.5 Baban @ Saprasen, (the daughter and other son of original accused No.1 Raosaheb respectively). The victim of the incident was Mangal (hereinafter referred as “victim), the wife of accused Dhanraj.

2. The five accused were tried in Sessions Case No.30/1993 for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short). The other accused got acquitted of the offence while present appellants- the accused No.2 and accused No.3 were convicted for offence punishable under Section 304-B of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years. They were convicted also for offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC, but no separate sentence was imposed. Thus, the present appeal.

3. The case of prosecution in brief is as follows :-

(a) The victim got married to accused No.2 Dhanraj in February 1992. On 26.2.1993, her brother Ratan Shahaji Pade (P.W.2) filed F.I.R. (Exh. 47) at Police Station, Ambajogai, District Beed, informing that he is resident of Pimpri Shiradhon, Taluka Kallam, District Osmanabad. His sister victim Mangal was married to accused Dhanraj about one year back, on 16.2.1992 (in evidence, this date is stated to be 10.2.1992). However, material is that the marriage took place in February 1992. The F.I.R. claims that, for the purpose of marriage, it was agreed to give Rs.25,000/- cash, one wrist watch and two dresses. Out of the agreed amount, Rs.20,000/- was paid at the time of marriage and Rs.5000/- was to be paid after one year. F.I.R. mentions the names of persons from the village Pimri Shiradhon, who were present, and others. The dowry as agreed was paid at the time of marriage. The victim was treated properly at the place of in-laws for 5-6 months. Thereafter, for the balance amount of dowry of Rs.5000/-, the victim was being given trouble. When the victim came to the place of her parents at the time of Panchami, Diwali, Sankrant, she was telling about the trouble. However, in order to save the relationship, they did not hurt the in-laws and were making their sister understand. The victim Mangal had trouble at the place of her in-laws, was known to her brothers, parents and others in the brotherhood. On 25.2.1993, at about 11.00 p.m. in the night, one Ramesh Shinde and Jeevan Gite came to the house of complainant and informed that their sister has died and her body was at Dastagirwadi. After getting the information, the complainant along with persons mentioned in the F.I.R. went to Dastagirwadi and saw the dead body of their sister Mangal kept near the wall. They enquired about the death from the accused persons, who only informed that the victim worked till 2.00 o'clock, and in the evening she died at about 4.00 p.m. The complainant had come to the Police Station and was filing the F.I.R. that the victim was given cruel treatment for the balance amount of dowry and getting fed up, she had committed suicide and thus the complaint.

(b) The F.I.R. was received by Head Constable Pandharinath Kamble (P.W.9) and the offence came to be registered at 9.10 a.m. on 26.2.1993 as Crime No.52/1993 at Police Station, Ambajogai. The investigation was taken over by P.S.I. Ramchandra Shinde (P.W. 12). He drew inquest panchanama (Exh. 44) and also prepared spot panchanama (Exh. 45). The dead body was sent for post mortem. The post mortem was done by Dr. Satyanarayan Goli (P.W. 11) at the Medical College Hospital, Ambajogai. Initially, the opinion was that the victim died of suspected poisoning with injury to the gravid uterus and contusion under the scalp. After examining the C.A. report and vicera, the final opinion was that she died due to injury to gravid uterus and the contusion under the scalp. The investig