Mool Chand Garg, J.

1. This judgment shall dispose of the aforesaid two appeals, filed by Rajiv Narula (hereinafter referred to as the first appellant) and by his mother Smt. Sunita Narula (hereinafter referred to as the second appellant) mother-in-law of deceased Suman Narula, who was married to the first appellant according to Hindu rites and customs on 22.11.87 and died an unnatural death by committing suicide on 23.8.88.

2. The appellants have assailed the impugned judgment dated 6.9.1997 and the order of sentence dated 9.9.97 whereby the Additional Sessions Judge has convicted both of them under Section 498A/306/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 5 years besides payment of fine of Rs. 2000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo S.I. for 3 months under Section 306/34 IPC. Under Section 498A they have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years besides payment of fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I. for 2 months with benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. Both the appellants are on bail. According to them they have been falsely implicated in this case by the parents of the deceased as there is no evidence against them.

3. While delivering the Judgment, the appellants and their father Rattan Lal Narula, who was also arrayed as an co-accused in this case, were acquitted under Section 304B IPC which was a charge framed in the alternative. Shri Rattan Lal Narula was also acquitted Under Section 498A IPC. In this regard the trial Court held that the evidence of the prosecution was not sufficient to hold that the deceased was harrased for demand of dowry soon before her death. The deposition of PW-2 Shri S.D. Malhotra father of the deceased and who is also the complainant in this case, and that of PW-4 Smt. Santosh Malhotra, mother of the deceased, was not believed to that extent. However it was held that the appellants certainly treated the deceased with mental cruelty within the meaning of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. By drawing presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act inserted in the Statute Book in 1983 presumption was drawn against the appellants that they had abetted the deceased to commit suicide and thus were guilty also under Section 306/34 of the Penal Code. It would be of relevance to note that both the deceased as well as the first appellant were/are Doctors by profession.

4. It is the case of the prosecution, that on 23.08.1988 at about 2.30 p.m police received information on telephone that deceased Suman Narula was brought to the AIIMS in the state of un- conciousness. In this regard DD No. 9A was recorded at PS Saraswati Vihar. SI Jagjit singh was then deputed for investigation who went to the hospital and collected MLC No. 55817 whereby the deceased was declared =brought dead. The said SI then went to the house of the parents of the deceased in Nanakpura where the deceased had been residing at that time and met PW-2 Shri S.D. Malhotra, who made the following statement to the Police that his daughter had married with Rajiv Narula according to Hindu Rites and Customs on 22.11.1987. In her marriage the complainant had given enough dowry in accordance with his status. From the date of the marriage, Rajiv, his father and mother started harassing his daughter saying that her parents had given less dowry. They also started giving beating to her. He further stated that they tortured her to such an extent that her daughter left her in-laws house within one month of her marriage and came to him. In the meanwhile, his son had come to the house of Rajiv to inquire as to why they were harassing Suman. They have also taunted the parents of Suman as to what they have given in the marriage. They also told the parents of the deceased that they have been humiliated in the society. They also asked the parents of Suman to give fridge, to which the complainant told that he is not in a position to give the same. After that his daughter told him th