ORDER :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

On the basis of the written report dated 19.09.2006 given by Gopal Prasad Burnwal to the police, Jharia P.S. Case No.332 of 2006 has been registered against Bijay Lal Burnwal, who is husband of the victim lady, Binay Kumar Burnwal, her younger brother-in-law and Siya Devi, her mother-in-law, under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. In S.T. Case No.108 of 2007, the appellant-Bijay Lal Burnwal who is husband of the deceased has been convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I for life under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and the appellant nos.2 and 3 have been convicted and sentenced to R.I for 10 years under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. Further, for the offence under section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the appellants are convicted and sentenced to R.I for 5 years and fine of Rs.2,000/- each.

3. The informant of this case is the father of Neelam Devi, the deceased. In his written report the informant has stated that marriage of his daughter was solemnized with Bijay Lal Burnwal in the year 2003 and after the marriage the accused persons were harassing her for demand of one colour television, one bed and Rs.10,000/- as dowry. On one occasion when he had gone to meet his daughter he has seen mark of belt on abdomen of his daughter. On 19.09.2006, on an information he had gone to the house of his daughter where he found that the accused persons had killed her and hanged her with a rope in the kadi giving it a colour of suicide. The informant has been examined as P.W.8. In the court he has deposed that the accused persons were harassing and torturing his daughter in connection to demand of a colour television, one bed and Rs.10,000/-and they were threatening to kill her. He has spoken about injury mark on his daughter's abdomen. He has stated that he received an information on 19.09.2006 about murder of his daughter. The wife of the informant has been examined as P.W.9. She has stated in the court that when her daughter came to her house the second time, she had informed her about marpit committed by her husband and his family members for demand of a colour television, one bed and Rs.10,000/-. She has further stated that whenever her daughter came to her house she had informed her about harassment by her family members. She has also stated about a telephonic information about murder of her daughter. The brother of Neelam Devi is P.W.7. He has also stated about demand of colour television, bed and Rs.10,000/-by the accused persons and harassment and torture of his sister by them in connection to demand of dowry. The maternal aunt of Neelam Devi who has been examined as P.W.10 has also stated about demand of dowry by the accused persons.

4. The essential ingredients for constituting the offence under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code are;

(i) death within 7 years of marriage,

(ii) death caused by any burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances, and

(iii) cruelty or harassment by the husband or any relative of the husband for or in connection with any demand for dowry soon before the death. Section 304-B has been incorporated in the Indian Penal Code by Act of 1986 and a corresponding amendment was made in the Indian Evidence Act, 1871 by incorporating section 113-B. The language employed in section 304-B IPC and section 113-B of the Evidence Act would reveal a common point of reference in both the provisions; the woman must have been “soon before her death” subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with the demand of dowry. In “Baijnath and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh” reported in (2017) 1 SCC 101, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has dealt with the presumption under section 113-B of the Evidence Act, 1872 and proof of cruelty or harassment, thus;

“29. Noticeably this presumption as well is founded on the proof of cruelty or harassment of the woman dead for or in connection with any demand f