The main legal point established is that the presumption of harassment for dowry under section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act requires the prosecution to prove the demand for dowry and harassment, and in this case, the court found that the prosecution failed to do so.

The State is the appellant. The respondents stood charged u/s.498-A, 306 and 304[B] IPC in SC.No.555/2005 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Poonamallee by Judgment dated 29.03.2006, the trial court acquitted the respondents. Challenging the same, the appellant has come up with this appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:-

[a] P.Ws.3 and 4 are the father and mother respectively of the deceased Lavanya. P.W.5 is the mother of P.W.3. The first accused [A1] is the son of the second accused [A2]. The marriage between A1 and Lavanya was celebrated on 05.03.2003. At the time of marriage, 55 sovereigns of gold jewels were presented by P.Ws.3 and 4 to the deceased. After the marriage, A1 and the deceased were living separately at Sivaganga where A1 was then working as Motor Vehicle Inspector. The marital life was initially joyful for one month. Thereafter, it is alleged that A2 started demanding dowry of Rs.1 lakh and a car to A1. The deceased informed the same to P.W.3 over phone. Since persistently such demand was made by A1 at the inducement of A2, P.W.4 went up to the house of A1 and told him that in due course, they would satisfy the demand. In the meanwhile, the deceased became pregnant. In the fifth month of the marriage, a function was organised to celebrate the same as per the custom. It was held at the house of P.Ws.3 and 4. During the said function, again it is alleged that A2 demanded Rs.1 lakh and a car as dowry. When the deceased was six months pregnant, "Valaikappu" was celebrated. At that time also, it is stated that A2 demanded dowry. A child was born on 07.01.2004. 5 sovereigns of gold was presented to the child. Even thereafter, it is alleged that A1 and A2 persistently demanded dowry and the same was informed by the deceased to P.Ws.3 and 4. On 22.06.2004, the deceased was taken to the house of P.Ws.3 and 4 by A1 and left her. While the deceased was at the house of P.Ws.3 and 4, A1 again spoke to her over phone and repeated the said demand. On 01.07.2004, the deceased spoke to P.W.4 over phone and told that she could not alive anymore because of the torture meted out to her. When P.W.3 in turn spoke to A1 over phone, A1 repeated the said demand. On 02.07.2004, the deceased committed suicide on hanging. In this regard, P.W.3 preferred a complaint under Ex.P.5.

[b] P.W.6 was then the Inspector of Police at Valasaravakkam Police Station. On receipt of Ex.P.5, complaint, he registered a case in Crime No.370 of 2004 for the offence u/s.174[3] Cr.P.C. and Ex.P.6 is the FIR. Since the death was within 1 = years of the marriage, he requested the Revenue Divisional Officer to hold inquest. He then forwarded the Case Diary to the Deputy Superintendent of Police for further investigation.

[c] One Subbaiah, the then Revenue Divisional Officer held inquest on the body of the deceased and submitted a report, Ex.P.10. [Since Mr.Subaiah is no more, he was not examined at the lower court]. P.W.7, who was then the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Poonamallee, took up the case for investigation. He proceeded to the spot and prepared the Observation Mahazar, Ex.P.1, in the presence of P.W.1 and another witness. He prepared Ex.P.8, the rough sketch. Then he examined P.Ws.3,4 and 5 and few more witnesses and recorded their statements. Since, from the statements of those witnesses, he came to understand that offences u/s.498-A and 304[b] had been committed by these 2 accused, he prepared an alteration report, Ex.P.9 thereby altering the FIR and altering case into one u/s.498-A and 304[b] IPC and forwarded the said report to the court. Then he arrested the accused and send them for judicial remand.

[d] The Revenue Divisional Officer, on completing the inquest, forwarded the body for postmortem. P.W.2 was then the Professor of Forensic Medicine in Kilpauk Medical College Hospital. On receiving the request from the Revenue Divisional Officer, he conducted the