Mr. Darshan Singh, J.: - The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant State of Haryana against the judgement of acquittal dated 5.5.2004 passed by the then learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar vide which the respondents were acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter called ‘the IPC’).

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that complainant-Rattan Singh had got four daughters and two sons. About 9/10 years prior to the occurrence, he had married his daughters Bhateri and Tripta with Dalbir and respondent-Anup Singh respectively sons of Bala Ram, resident of Balsamand. His daughter Tripta was harassed by her husband Anup Singh and her mother-in-law Shanti Devi. Anup Singh used to beat her after taking liquor and Shanti Devi used to instigate Anup Singh for beating her. This act was disclosed by his daughter Bhateri on 2.5.2002. Bhateri had also disclosed that Tripta had told her that due to the harassment given by Anup Singh and Shanti Devi, she was fed up and it is better to die than to live in such a situation. On 3.5.2002, he received a telephone call at about 5:30 PM from Azad Singh, resident of Balsamand to the effect that Tripta has died and then he along with his son Mahender Singh and brother Beer Singh went to Balsamand at the house of Tripta and found that she was lying dead on the cot. She was having a ligature mark around her neck. He had satisfied himself that she has committed suicide due to harassment given by her husband and mother-in-law. The statement of complainant- Rattan Singh Ex.P16 was recorded by SI Kartar Singh, SHO Police Station Adampur on the basis of which formal FIR Ex. P17 was registered and investigation was started.

3. SI Kartar Singh along with other police officials inspected the spot. He got the spot photographed. Inquest proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C were conducted. The Investigating Officer also prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence. The rope which was used as ligature was taken into possession vide memo Ex.P28. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination through ASI Des Raj and Constable Jagdish. The post-mortem examination was conducted at Civil Hospital, Hisar on 4.5.2002. After the post-mortem examination, the doctor handed over the belongings of the deceased in a sealed parcel which was taken into possession by the Investigating Officer vide memo Ex.P26. Accused were arrested on 4.5.2002. The leaf of Bahi Ex.P29 was taken into possession vide memo Ex. P30.

4. On completion of the formalities of the investigation, the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C was presented in the Court.

5. The accused respondents were charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 498-A of the IPC by the learned trial Court vide order dated 27.8.2002 to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses.

7. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C, the accused respondents pleaded false implication and innocence. It was further pleaded that Bal Kishan, the father-in-law of the deceased, had executed a Will in February 2001 bequeathing his land in favour of her grandson Sumit (son of accused Anup Singh) and also the son of Dalbir Singh, the brother of respondent-Anup Singh. The said Will was cancelled by Bal Kishan on 14.12.2001. The deceased was not happy and she asked her father-inlaw to deposit the money in the name of her son which he did not, due to this reason, she committed suicide. The father of the deceased had got registered a false case to pressurise them so that his father may transfer the land to Sumit and Sunil. On 27.2.2003, Bal Kishan under the pressure of complainant-Rattan Singh made a release deed in favour of the son of the deceased and in favour of Sunil son of Dalbir Singh. Rattan Singh also got the possession of the said land because Sumit and Sunil were minors. Accused Shan