ORDER :

(Ashutosh Kumar, J.)

This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants Charan Singh and Smt. Shakuntala Devi against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge No.1, Behror, District Alwar in Sessions Case No.21/2015: State v. Charan Singh and Ors. by which learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:

"- for offecne under Section 302 read with 34 IPC to L.I. each with fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default of payment of fine 3 years R.I. each.

- for offence under Section 498A IPC to 3 years R.I. each with fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine 6 months additional S.I. each.

- for offence under Section 406 IPC to 3 years R.I. each with fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine 6 months additional S.I. each.

- for offence under Section 201 IPC to 3 years R.I. each with fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine 6 months additional S.I. each."

2. The case of prosecution in nutshell before the learned trial Court was that complainant Jagdish Prasad filed an FIR (Ex.P.-3) in Police Station Neemrana disclosing therein that his daughter Sarita was married to appellant Charan Singh on 29.04.2013. After marriage, in-laws of his daughter were torturing her to bring a Swift Dzire car. The deceased was continuously telling about such demands to Jagdish Prasad (father of deceased) and her mother. Since, he could not meet the demand of the appellant, the husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased strangulated and killed her on 05.01.2015. FIR No.9/2015 was registered and after investigation a charge sheet against husband of the deceased, Charan Singh was filed for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304-B, 406, 302 and 201 IPC and investigation was kept pending under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C., against Shankuntala Devi and Udai Chand. They were made accused in this case and summoned for trial under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

3. All the three accused persons were charged for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 201 and 304-B and in alternative 302 IPC.

4. The prosecution examined 23 witnesses and exhibited 23 documents.

5. Accused persons were examined under Sections 313 Cr.P.C. No witness was examined on behalf of the defence. However, defence has relied on Exhibit D-1 to Exhibit D-21.

6. Learned trial Court in its judgment dated 30.11.2017 acquitted accused Udai Chand for offences under Sections 498A, 406, 201, 302 read with Section 34 IPC. However, appellants Charan Singh and Shakuntala Devi were convicted and punished as mentioned here-in-above.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the learned trial Court has erred in convicting the accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC because there is no evidence, by which the case against the accused can be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Counsel for the appellants contends that learned trial Court has convicted the appellants, merely on the basis of baseless assumptions. It has also been contended that since the learned trial Court has not found any case against the accused persons under Section 304-B IPC, it means that there was no evidence on record to prove that soon before her death, the deceased was subjected to harassment and cruelty. They contend that this proves the fact that there was no motive to kill the deceased. He further contends that there is no direct evidence in this case and the learned trial Court has drawn its conclusion of conviction only by presuming certain facts. He furthe