Sole appellant, Lalan Kumar has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 304B of the I.P.C. as well as Section 201 of the I.P.C. and accordingly been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 304B of I.P.C. and rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 201 of I.P.C. as well as a composite fine appertaining to Rs.25,000/- has been inflicted against both heads of conviction and in default thereof, to undergo S.I. for three months additionally with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently with a further event of set off against the period already undergone during course of trial in terms of Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-1st, Jehanabad vide judgment of conviction dated 12.02.2015 and order of sentence dated 20.02.2015 relating to Sessions Trial No.334 of 2014/ 92 of 2014.

2. Suresh Yadav, PW-4, had filed written report on 14.11.2013 alleging inter alia that his third daughter Simpi Kumari was married with Lalan Kumar (appellant), S/o Ramanuj Yadav of village-Gulamichak in the month of Fagun in Year 2012 as per Hindu rites and customs. At the time of marriage, he had gifted according to his means. Soon after marriage, his daughter was being tortured by her husband, Dewar, Bhainsur, Gotni, Sasur on the pretext of demand of motorcycle and further, threatened that in case of non-availability of the same, they will not allow her to stay at sasural and in the aforesaid background, on 13.11.2013, his sister, who happens to be married in Gulamichak itself has telephonically informed him that his daughter Simpi Kumar has been murdered by her husband Lalan Kumar, father in-law Ramanuj Yadav, Gotni Rinki Kumari, brother in-law Raj Kishore Yadav, Bhainsur Lal Babu Yadav, Babu Chand Yadav and wife of Babu Chand Yadav namely Gulabo Devi and further, concealed the dead body. Soon after receiving aforesaid information, he along with his family members came to Gulamichak and found all the accused persons absent. Lock was hanging. They made hectic effort to search out the dead body, but failed and on account thereof, came to police station and informed the police. Then thereafter, with the help of police personnel, the dead body of Simpi Kumari was traced out in the drain East to Chhotki Murari Village.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid written report, Jehanabad Mahila P. S. Case No.97 of 2013 was registered under Section 304B/34 of the I.P.C. whereunder chargesheet was also submitted against the appellant, who was apprehended, keeping the investigation pending against others who were absconding and accordingly, cognizance of the offences so indicated were taken facilitating the trial which concluded in a manner, the subject matter of instant appeal.

4. Defence case as pleaded by the appellant as well as statement recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. is that of complete denial of occurrence. Furthermore, it has been pleaded that deceased was of weak mental state and on account thereof, she used to slip from the house and during course thereof, met with unfortunate incidence and for that, none of them were responsible. Furthermore, it has also been pleaded that family members of Naiharwala were informed. They came and joined along with them in search of alleged victim. After recovery of dead body, Naiharwala of deceased demanded Rs. One Lac, which was declined on account thereof, this false case has been registered. To substantiate the same, two DWs have also been examined namely DW-1 Daroga Prasad and DW-2 Umesh Prasad.

5. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution had examined altogether six PWs, out of whom, PW-1 Rameshwar Yadav, PW-2 Pyari Devi, PW-3 Surendra Paswan, PW-4 Suresh Yadav, PW- 5 Dr. Dinesh Kumar and PW-6 Priti Kumar. Side by side, had also exhibited the document as Exhibit-1 written report, Exhibit-2 F.S.L. Report, Exhibit-3 post mortem report, Exhibit-4 endorsement over written report, Exhibit-5 formal F.I.R. As