I.A. Ansari, J.

1. Dowry is a social evil. No wonder, therefore, that the Legislature has made stringent laws to deal with the devilish acts of dowry by enacting the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and incorporating, in the Indian Penal Code too, Sections 498A and 304B. Though the menace of dowry still survives, what needs to be borne in mind is that howsoever serious a charge may be against an accused, the offence, alleged to have been committed by him, must be proved in accordance with law. Gravity of an offence cannot make admissible a piece of evidence, which is, otherwise, inadmissible. It is the duty of the court to ensure that every piece of evidence, which it considered against an accused, is admissible in law, for, howsoever grave the charge against the accused may be he can be convicted only when, we must remember, he is proved guilty in accordance with law.

2. By the impugned judgment and order, dated 1.2.1999, passed in Case No. S.T. 117 (WT/A) 96, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (No. 2), West Tripura, Agartala, the accused-appellant stands convicted under Section 498A of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs.2,000 and, in default, rigorous imprisonment for a further period of 6 months.

3. The case against the accused-appellant, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be described as follows:

The accused-appellant's son, Arjun Acharjee, was the husband of deceased, Chinu Rani Acharjee, their marriage having been solemnized, on 13.3.1994, at the paternal house of the said deceased. At the time when the marriage alliance was negotiated and settled, the accused-appellant demanded a sum of Rs.20,000 in cash, some gold ornaments, wooden furniture, etc., as dowry. Out of the demand so raised, deceased Chinu Rani Acharjee's father, namely, Tarani Mohan Acharjee paid Rs.15,000, some gold ornaments and wooden furniture at the time of marriage and assured the accused-appellant, Nirode Ranjan Acharjee, that he would be paid the balance amount of Rs.5,000 within a period of one year. The husband and, the father-in-law of Chinu Rani Acharjee, however, started torturing her both physically and mentally for non-payment of the said unpaid amount of Rs.5,000. At a later stage, though a sum of Rs.3,000 was paid, in cash, to the present accused-appellant, the balance amount of Rs.2,000 still remained unpaid. As the entire amount had not been paid as promised, Arjun Acharjee, (i.e., the husband of the said deceased) did not attend the ceremonial function, known as 'Jamaisashti', at the parental house of the said deceased. Apart from the fact that the said deceased, while alive, ceased to be cheerful and looked depressed, she wrote a letter, on 18.5.1994, to her father requesting him to meet the pending demands raised by her in-laws. During investigation, police seized, inter alia, the letter aforementioned of the said deceased. On the intervening night of 29th and 30th of June, 1994, Chinu Rani was admitted to IGM hospital, Agartala, with history of diarrhea and within hours of her admission, she died there. On her death, her brother, Shri Khogendra Acharjee, lodged a First Information Report with the police at East Agartala Police Station, on 30.6.1994, alleging, inter alia, that deceased Chinu Rani had been subjected to cruelty since her marriage for the reasons of dowry and that the informant suspected some foul play behind the death of his sister. Based on the First Information Report, so lodged. East Agartala P.S. Case No. 98/1994 was registered under Section 498A/304B/34, IPC against the present accused appellant and his said son, Arjun Acharjee. The post mortem report failed to reveal signs of any external injury or cause of death. The viscera of the deceased, however, on chemical analysis, at the Forensic Science Laboratory, Calcutta, revealed that her death was caused by consumption of carbonate poison, which is an insecticide poison. A death certificate was accordingly i