JUDGMENT

B. U. Debadwar, J. - This appeal has been directed under Section 378(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C."), against the judgment and order dated 26-12-2002 passed by the learned IInd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Sessions Case No.230 of 1999, whereby acquitted all the five accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 306 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "I.P.C.")

2. Facts giving rise to present appeal in nutshell are as under :

a) Respondent No.2 Dattatraya Maruti Kolhe and respondent No.3 Jankabai w/o Dattatraya Kolhe are the husband and wife inter se. Respondent No.1 Vijay Dattatraya Kolhe and Respondent No.5 Sharda w/o Prakash Pawar are their son and daughter, respectively. Respondent No.4 Prakash Baburao Pawar is the husband of respondent No.5 Sharda. All the respondents are residents of Joshiwadi, Tq. Shirur, Dist. Pune.

b) Deceased Jyoti @ Kavita was the daughter of Haribhau Laxman Karkhile and Shakuntala Haribhau Karkhile, resident of Plot No.16, Shahu Nagar, Kedgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar. Karkhile family and Kolhe family originally hail from Parner Taluka, District Ahmednagar. The native place of Haribhau Karkhile was village Ralegan Therpal, whereas native place of respondent No.2 Dattatraya Kolhe was village Loni Haveli.

c) With the intervention of close relatives of both the families, marriage of deceased Jyoti with respondent No.1 Vijay was settled. As per the terms of settlement, marriage was to be solemnized on 01-02-1998 at Kedgaon, which would be convenient for both the families and their relatives. At the time of settlement of marriage, respondents had expressed their desire that marriage should be solemnized in a grand manner. Respondents did not demand any gift or dowry. Haribhau and his family members agreed for performance of marriage of deceased Jyoti and accused No.1 Vijay at Kedgaon in the best of possible manner.

d) Upon settlement of marriage and fixing the date and venue, Haribhau got printed and distributed wedding invitation cards amongst relatives and well wishers.

e) Four to five days prior to 01-02-1998, respondent No.1 Vijay and respondent No.2 Dattatraya reached to Kedgaon, at the house of Haribhau and said him that unless dowry of Rs.75,000/- and ornaments of five tolas gold is given, the marriage of Jyoti would not be performed with Vijay. Besides, they told Haribhau that marriage should be performed at Ramling Temple of Shirur, Pune and not at Kedgaon. After consulting with wife Shakuntala, Haribhau accepted aforesaid conditions, put forth by respondent No.1 Vijay and respondent No.2 Dattatraya. However, he expressed his ability to pay dowry of Rs.50,000/- out of Rs.75,000/- and gold ornaments of five tolas, at the time of marriage and sought permission to pay balance dowry amount of Rs.25,000/- after marriage, in due course. Respondent No.1 Vijay and respondent No.2 Dattatraya both agreed for the same.

f) Accordingly, on 01-02-1998, marriage of deceased Jyoti was solemnized with respondent No.1 Vijay at Ramling Temple, Shirur as per Hindu rites and customs prevailing in their community.

g) After marriage deceased Jyoti went to her matrimonial house situated at Joshiwadi, Shirur and started residing and cohabiting with husband Vijay there, in joint family of all accused.

h) Matrimonial life of deceased Jyoti was normal for about 10 months after marriage. Thereafter, husband and father-in-law started insisting her for bringing balance dowry amount of Rs.25,000/- and subjecting her to cruelty for that, in the form of beating and starving her. Respondent No.4 Prakash and respondent No.5 Sharda, residing in their neighbourhood, also started taunting Jyoti on account of remainder dowry amount of Rs.25,000/-. Deceased Jyoti used to disclose about harassment and ill treatment meted out by husband and in-laws on account of remainder dowry amount of Rs.25,000/- to her parents and brother