The judgment establishes the application of Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code in cases of dowry death, emphasizing the burden on the accused to provide a credible explanation for the death.

Since both these appeals arise out of a common judgment and order, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. This case of dowry death arising out of un-fulfilled demand of dowry and consequent cruelty depicts meticulous planning and neat execution of crime in the matrimonial home of the deceased. I have evidence of ante mortem burn injury of the deceased as well as medical evidence highlighting killing the daughter of the informant, by squeezing the throat manually.

3. Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1197 of 2010 has been preferred by the appellant Sita Devi who is mother-in-law of the deceased Sabita Kumari, whereas Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 195 of 2011 has been filed by the appellant Sunil Pandey who is husband of the deceased.

4. The above appeals are directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 7th December, 2010 passed in Sessions Trial No. 547 of 2009 arising out of Bhagwan Bazar P.S. Case No. 71 of 2008 by the Fast Track Court No. 1, Bhagalpur convicting the appellants under Sections 304-B and 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years for the offence under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence under Sections 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court has directed the sentences awarded against the appellants to run concurrently.

5. The case of the prosecution is based on a fardbeyan made by Gangadhar Pandey before one S.P. Mandal, a Sub-Inspector of Police of Bhagwan Bazar police station on 13th July, 2008 at 5.30 a.m. at Brahmpur Nayi Basti alleging therein that the informant had married his daughter Sabita Kumari in May 2002 with the appellant Sunil Pandey and after marriage, the appellant Sunil Pandey and his family members started demanding a Hero Honda motorcycle and rupees fifty thousand in cash. For this demand, the deceased was being physically and mentally tortured. Ten days prior to the lodging of the FIR, the deceased was compelled to bring Hero Honda motorcycle and rupees fifty thousand in cash. She was threatened that if she would not bring the motorcycle and money as demanded by the appellants, she would be killed and her dead body would be disposed of. In the fardbeyan, it has further been claimed by the informant that he was telephonically informed by someone in the night at about 11 p.m. on 12th July, 2008 that his daughter has been killed by her mother-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law and husband and the accused persons are planning to dispose of her dead body. On getting this information, the informant (P.W. 4) and his son Shashi Bhushan Pandey (P.W. 1) came to the appellants home and enquired about the whereabouts of his daughter from her mother-in-law Sita Devi who stood at the door, not allowing the informant and his son to enter the house and said that the deceased Sabita Devi has gone to Delhi. Thereafter, suspecting foul the informant sent information to Bhagwan Bazar Police Station about the occurrence. On such oral information, the police party came to the place of occurrence and started searching for the dead body of Sabita Kumari. On search, the police found the dead body of the deceased from the east of the house of the appellants covered and concealed with grass and hay. The informant has alleged that the deceased has been killed by throttling and, thereafter, hot water has been sprinkled on her dead body by the accused Sunil Pandey (husband), Rajendra Pandey (brother-in-law), Sita Devi (mother-in-law) and Nilam Devi (sister-in-law).

6. On the basis of this fardbeyan, Bhagwan Bazar P.S. Case No. 71 of 2008 under Section 304-B was registered by the police on 13.7.2008 at 9 a.m. and investigation was taken up. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted by the police, whereupon cognizance was taken and after complying with the requirements of Section 207 of the Code of Criminal