The main legal point established is that persistent demand for dowry and circumstantial evidence can lead to the conviction of an accused for causing the death of his wife.

MADAN B. LOKUR, J.

( 1 ) THE Appellant is aggrieved by a judgment and order dated 27th March, 2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 162/99 convicting him of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal code (for short IPC ). By another order passed on the same date, the Appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

( 2 ) THE Appellant was married to one Meenakshi (the deceased) on 10th march, 1985. From the evidence of the witnesses, it appears that she was being harassed for bringing inadequate dowry. In fact, her father had stated that he had twice given Rs. 5,000/- to the Appellant but even that was not enough. Sometime before her death, the Appellant had asked Meenakshi to arrange rs. 25,000/- but due to her inability to do so, she was beaten up by the appellant and sent to her father's house. On the intervention of some relatives as well as her father, Meenakshi was persuaded to return to her matrimonial home. She returned to her matrimonial home on 8th May, 1999 after expressing an apprehension that the Appellant would not leave her alive.

( 3 ) ON 12th May, 1999, a report was received by the police authorities at about 1. 15 am to the effect that Meenakshi had been burnt to death. Thereupon, the police conducted necessary investigations and filed a challan under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On 25th October, 1999, the following charges were framed against the Appellant:"that between 10. 3. 85 and 8. 5. 99 in your house no. 44-A, Arjun Park near Dairy within the jurisdiction of P. S. Najafgarh, you being the husband of Meenakshi subjected her to cruelty for want of dowry and thereby you committed an offence punishable u/s 498-A IPC and within the cognizance of this court. Secondly, on or before 8. 5. 99 you caused the death of Meenakshi for want of dowry and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 302 IPC and within the cognizance of this court. And in the alternative, between 10. 3. 85 and 8. 5. 99 you harassed and tortured meenakshi and abetted her to commit suicide and thereby you committed an offence punishable u/s 306 IPC and within the cognizance of this Court. "the Appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

( 4 ) THE prosecution examined eight witnesses but the more important ones are the children of the Appellant as well as the doctor who conducted the post-mortem.

( 5 ) PW5 Dr. Komal Singh who was posted as CMO, Civil Hospital, Rajpur Road, delhi conducted the post-mortem on the deceased and opined that the cause of her death was asphyxia due to strangulation of the neck by means of ligature sufficient to kill a person. She stated that the mode of death was homicide and burn injuries were post-mortem in nature. The doctor was cross-examined but only on the nature of the burn injuries and not at all on the question how the death of Meenakshi took place.

( 6 ) PW-1 Surinder Sharma is the son of the Appellant. At the time of his examination in September, 2000 he was about ten years old. He was put some court questions to see whether he understood the questions properly and was able to answer them intelligently. Upon the court being satisfied that the witness is competent, he was allowed to be examined. He confirmed that his mother had died on 12th May, 1999. On that day, he was sleeping on the roof of the house with his sister Renu and had been sent to the roof by his father. After some time, his father came upstairs and told him that he (the father) had a quarrel with the deceased and that he (the witness) should not tell this to anyone else. He later found that his mother had died. He was not cross-examined by the appellant.

( 7 ) PW-4 Renu Sharma is the daughter of the Appellant. When she was examined in December, 2000, she was about twelve years of age. She narrated the events of the fateful evening and stated that her father had