JUDGMENT :

Mukta Gupta, J.

1. By these two appeals, the appellants challenge the common impugned judgment dated 5th May, 2017 whereby the appellants have been convicted for offence punishable under Section 326-A/34 IPC and the order on sentence dated 26th May, 2017 whereby they have been directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 11 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs each, in default whereof to undergo 1 year simple imprisonment. The fine so imposed is to be given to the victim as compensation.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant Bharat submits that the impugned judgment has been passed by the learned Trial Court by shifting the burden of proof on the accused, though it was the prosecution which was required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There is no evidence on record to show that the appellant Bharat had asked for the number of the complainant at the time of marriage of Deepak or that Bharat used to call the complainant to enquire about the well-being of his sister, or that on 25th June, 2013 Bharat came to her home and proposed her for marriage, or that on the refusal of the complainant, Bharat slapped her and took the SIM card of her mobile phone, t