JUDGMENT :

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the CrPC is directed against the impugned judgment & order dated 30-5-2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, in Sessions Trial No.18/2015, by which the three appellants herein, who are son, father and mother, respectively, have been convicted for offences under Sections 304B read with Section 34 & 302 read with section 34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and imprisonment for life & pay fine of Rs.1,000/-each, in default of payment of fine to further undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for one year, respectively, with a direction to run the sentences concurrently.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27-4-2015 at 5.35 a.m. on the pretext of demand of dowry, wife of appellant No.1 namely Smt. Lata Chandra (deceased) suffered unnatural death within seven years of marriage in other than normal circumstances and thereby the appellants have committed the offences. Marriage of deceased Lata was solemnized with accused/appellant Dineshwar Chandra (A-1) on 22-4-2015 and within five days of marriage, she suffered unnatural death on account of demand of dowry by the present appellants, who are husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, respectively.

3. The matter was reported to the police pursuant to which inquest was conducted vide Ex.P-5 and FIR was registered vide Ex.P-14. Crime details form was prepared vide Ex.P-1 and morgue intimation was registered vide Exs.P-12 & 13. The dead body of the deceased was sent for postmortem which was conducted by Dr. D. Behra (PW-8) vide postmortem report Ex.P-9 in which cause of death was stated to be shock due to antemortem burns which is sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Dying declaration of the deceased was recorded by the Executive Magistrate, which was not brought on record, in which the deceased is said to have stated that her husband, father-in-law & mother-in-law – the appellants herein, have poured kerosene oil on her body and set her ablaze. The doctor gave report that the deceased suffered 95% burn injuries. Thus, prima facie, the deceased sustained burn injuries and died on account of the cruelty meted out to her by her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law i.e. the appellants herein. Articles were seized and seized articles were sent for chemical examination to the Food Inspector, who found kerosene oil in the plastic container seized from the spot vide Ex.P-2.

4. Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC. After due investigation, the accused/appellants were charge-sheeted for offences under Sections 304B read with Section 34 & 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and charge-sheet was filed before the jurisdictional criminal court and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, Raigarh, from where the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, received the case on transfer for conducting the trial and for hearing and disposal in accordance with law.

5. The prosecution, in order to bring home the offence, has examined as many as 16 witnesses and exhibited 24 documents Exs.P-1 to P-24 and Article 1 – Wedding Card. The appellants abjured the guilt and entered into defence. They have examined none, but exhibited three documents namely, Exs.D-1 to D-3 i.e. the statements of Lakshan Bai, Smt. Lata Chandra & Nanda Nayak recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC at their instance in support of their case. The appellants were examined under Section 313 of the CrPC in which they denied the guilt.

6. The trial Court after considering ocular, oral and documentary evidence on record, convicted the accused/appellants under Sections 304B read with Section 34 & 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC against which this appeal has been preferred by the appellants.

7. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, would submit that though the appellants have been