Mr. Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.: (Oral) - The epitome of the facts & evidence, unfolded during the course of trial, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant appeal and emanating from the record, as claimed by the prosecution, is that the marriage of appellant-convict Mam Raj son of Maru Singh (for brevity “the appellant”) was solemnized with Smt.Santosh, sister of complainant Dinesh Singh son of Phool Singh (PW1) (for short “the complainant”) on 20.5.1997, according to Hindu rites & ceremonies. The sufficient dowry articles and cash were stated to have been given by her parents as per their status and capacity at the time of marriage, but the accused were not satisfied with the same. After some time of the marriage, she had gone to her parents house at village Jatoli and narrated that Mam Raj, her husband, Maru Singh & Anguri Devi (parents-in-law) and Kuldeep Singh, brother-in-law (Devar) had been harassing and beating her for bringing insufficient dowry articles. An amount of Rs. 10,000/- was paid in cash to the accused by her parents to settle Santosh at her matrimonial home, but in vain. On 25.6.1999, Abdesh Kumar (PW2), another brother of the deceased, had gone to her matrimonial home, where the accused asked him to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- as they had purchased a new tractor. Thereafter, he brought Santosh to her parental house. She narrated her entire tale of woe and stated that the accused would not allow her to settle in her matrimonial home, unless they were paid a sum of Rs. 20,000/-. It was averred that on 30.6.1999, the husband of the deceased, came to village Jatoli, took her to her matrimonial home and renewed the indicated demand of money. However, they promised to pay the amount at a later stage.

2. The case of the prosecution further proceeds that on 7.7.1999, Harpal Singh, husband of another sister of the complainant, came to village Jatoli from village Tigrana and told that Santosh was lying admitted in serious condition in General Hospital, Bhiwani. On receiving the information, the complainant and his cousin brothers Jagdish and Yashbir reached the hospital. On reaching there at about 10 P.M., Santosh was found dead on account of burn injuries. The matter was reported to the police by the complainant alleging therein that the accused have set her on fire on account of bringing insufficient dowry and cash.

3. Leveling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the complainant claimed that the death of his sister Santosh was caused by burn injuries and occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances within a period of three years of her marriage. She was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband and other pointed relatives in connection with and on account of demand of dowry. Thus, they have committed the offence of dowry death. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of statement (Ex.PA) of complainant, the present criminal case was registered against appellant Mam Raj (husband), his parents Maru Singh and Anguri Devi (parentsin- law) and Kuldeep Singh, brother-in-law (Devar) of the deceased, by means of FIR No.231 dated 8.7.1999 (Ex.PA/2), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 304-B & 498-A read with section 34 IPC by the police of Police Station Sadar Bhiwani, in the manner depicted here-in-above.

4. After completion of the investigation, the final police report (challan) was submitted by the police against them to face the trial for the offences in question.

5. Having completed all the codal formalities, the appellants and acquitted accused were charge-sheeted for the commission of offences punishable under sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. As they did not plead guilty and claimed trial, therefore, the case was slated for evidence of the prosecution by the trial Court.

6. Sequelly, the prosecution, in order to substantiate the charges framed against the appellants and acquitted accused,