These appeals are directed against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bajali, Pathsala dated 8.7.2015 in sessions case 26/2008 whereby appellants are sentenced to R/i for 7 years with fine of Rs 5,000 each u/s 304(B) of the IPC and in default to s/i for 3 months and further they are sentenced to R/i for 5 years with a fine of Rs 5,000 each u/s 306/34 of the IPC and in default to S/i for 2 months with further direction both the sentences to run concurrently.

2. I have heard Mr R De, learned amicus curiae for appellant (Hiten Sarma) and Mr B Sarma, learned additional public prosecutor for the state. However none appears for other two appellants.

3. The background facts in a nutshell are as follows.

(i) One Smt. Bhanu Devi lodged an FIR on 26.6.2007 to the effect that her younger sister Urvasi Devi was given marriage to Hiten Sarma on 10.5.2006 as per the Hindu rights and thereafter they led a conjugal life. It is alleged that her husband Hiten Sarma and sister-in-law Jutika Devi and her husband Tapan Goswami started torturing her both physically and mentally demanding money, landed property in dowry. The landed property belonged to the elder brother of said Urvashi situated at Pathsala was demanded by them. As result of denial to fulfil the demand she was subjected to torture and harassment by her husband and in-laws. Unable to bear the torture, Urvashi committed suicide by drowning her in a pond near the house of her husband on 26.6.2007.

(ii) On the basis of the said FIR investigation started. The dead body of the victim woman was recovered from the pond near the house of accused. One bunch of key was recovered from the body of the deceased belong to the Godrej alimirah of the deceased. On opening of the alimirah the police recovered two letters(suicide note) which were written on the date of her suicide that the accused persons were responsible for her death. Necessary inquest report was prepared and the dead body was sent for post mortem examination.

(iii) During investigation incriminating evidence in the form of oral as well as medical evidence regarding the death of Urvasi was collected which reflects the death was caused by asphyxia as a result of drowning. All the above accused persons were put on trial for the offence u/s 304(B) of the IPC as per the chargesheet submitted against them.

(iv) On committal of the case to the court of sessions, the case came up for trial before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bajali, Pathsala. All the accused persons faced trial and denied the charge u/s 304(B)/306/34 of the IPC framed against them and demanded a trial. Prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses and exhibited some documents and defence examined none. The plea of defence is of total denial. Statement of accused persons were recorded u/s 313 of the CrPC and at the conclusion of trial all the accused persons were held guilty and sentenced as aforesaid. Hence these appeals.

4. Learned amicus curiae appearing for appellant (Hiten Sarma) advanced his arguments solely on the point that the suicide note purportedly written by the deceased has not implicated her husband for any torture nor has specifically spell out the dowry demand by her husband. That being so and also in view of the fact that there is no instigation on the part of accused appellant to commit suicide by his wife, the appellant is no way liable to be convicted under the Sections 306 IPC. Reliance is placed on AIR 2008 SC 2108, Suhan Raj Sarma vs. State of Haryana; 2009 (16) SCC 605, Chitrese Kumar Chopra vs. State; 2009 (4) SCC 52, Kishangiri Mangalgiri Goswami vs. State of Gujarat, wherein it is held that in absence of proof of direct or indirect acts of the incitement to commission of suicide, the ingredient of Section 306 of the IPC is not made out. Referring to the evidence on record argument was put forward on behalf of appellant that save and except certain allegation of torture or harassment no specific evidence is made out to cons