1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants to challenge the judgment dated 25.11.2003 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No. 104/2003, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced for life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month rigorous imprisonment.

2. During the pendency of the present appeal, Smt. Shillo Devi and Madan passed away. Their death certificates are produced on record by learned counsel for the appellants. The fact of their death has been verified by learned public prosecutor also. Since they have passed away, the appeal qua them stands abated.

3. In nutshell, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 27.06.1991 at around 2.15 a.m. a Parchabayan of Dalip Kumar at Bed No. 2, Government Hospital, P.N.B. was recorded. In the said Parchabayan, it was stated that his in-laws are staying at Dhakka Basti Mandi, Pilibanga. His father-in-law is Amarchand Oad. His wife is staying with his in-laws, therefore, he came there yesterday morning to meet his wife and returned the next morning. Thereafter, again he came to the place of his in-laws and in the evening, while he was sitting in the in-law's house, he did not remember the time but it was quite dark and there was no electricity, suddenly, his in-laws poured oil on him and alighted the fire. In alighting the fire, his wife and kids were not involved. After alighting the fire, nobody came to rescue him and he was struggling himself. He did not remember who brought him to the hospital, but a number of persons were present there. It was further stated that his in-laws were harassing him for the last six years and whenever his wife came to her parental house, they delayed her coming back, whereas he could not live without his wife.

4. On this parchabayan, an F.I.R. bearing No. 144/91 was registered and investigation was conducted. After investigation, police filed a negative final report. A protest petition was filed by Diwan Chand. After hearing learned counsel for the complainant, this protest petition was also dismissed vide order dated 10/03/1993. Thereafter, a revision petition was filed by the complainant before the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh, which was partially allowed vide order dated 19/10/1994, and the matter was remanded to the trial Court. The complainant produced ten witnesses in his favour and ultimately, the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pilibanga vide order dated 29.07.1999 took cognizance against five persons i.e. Amarchand, Smt. Shillo Devi, Sharwan, Madan and Bhagwana for the offence under Sections 302 and 120B of IPC. They were summoned by the warrant of arrest and the matter was committed for trial before the Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh.

5. Learned trial Court framed charges against the accused appellants for the offence under Sections 302 and 120B of IPC. The accused denied the same and preferred trial in the matter.

6. During the trial, as many as 10 prosecution witnesses were examined and in all 9 documents were exhibited, whereas 2 defence witnesses were examined on defence side and as many as 11 documents were exhibited.

7. Thereafter, accused appellants were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and were confronted with the evidence adduced during trial to which they denied and submitted that they are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the matter.

8. Learned trial Court, after hearing the arguments advanced on both the sides and after taking into consideration the statements of witnesses and the documents exhibited, convicted and sentenced the accused appellants Smt. Shillo Devi, Sharwan and Madan vide judgment dated 25.11.2003 but acquitted the father-in-law Amarchand of the charges under Sections 302 and 120B of IPC.

9. For appreciating the facts in detail, we have gone through the statements recorded d