The delay in lodging the FIR and the lack of evidence to prove the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 304-B IPC were central to the court's decision.

( 1 ) THIS appeal on behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh has been filed against the judgment and order dated 22. 08. 2000 passed by Sri A. K. Agrawal, VIIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in Sessions Trial No. 657 of 1998, acquitting the accused respondent Virendra of the charges under Section 304-B I. P. C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

( 2 ) BRIEF facts of the case are that the complainant Mahavir Prasad (P. W. I) son of Sri Sita Ram is the father of the deceased Shrimati Seema, who was married to accused Virendra about six and half years ago from the date of incident. She gave birth to two children out of the said wedlock one son and another daughter,. Virendra accused was employed in Sugar Mill Daurala at the relevant time and was residing along with his family i. e. Shrimati Seema and the two children in a rented house belonging to one Sri Brahm Swaroop situated in Mill Market.

( 3 ) IT is alleged that the complainant on 22. 01. 1998 in the evening received information through kailash Chandra (P. W. 3) that his daughter Shrimati Seema had been burnt alive. The complainant along with his family members immediately rushed to Daurala at the house of virendra where he carne to know that Seema in burnt condition had been taken to Lok Priya nursing Home, Meerut for treatment. The complainant immediately went there but did not find seema in the Nursing Home and there he had come to know that Seema was referred to safdarjung Hospital, Delhi. The complainant then reached Delhi and - found his daughter admitted in the Hospital in burnt condition. She was lying unconscious, at that time. She succumbed to her burn injury on 25. 1. 1998 in the morning hours.

( 4 ) AFTER performing the last rites i. e. cremation etc. of Seema the complainant lodged a report at the Police Station on 28. 01. 1998 against Virendra, accused respondent specifically alleging therein that Virendra used to harass and mal-treat the deceased Shrimati Seema after marriage due to non-fulfillment of demand of the accused for dowry. Shrimati Seema deceased had made complaint of Virendra to the complainant and to her mother many times prior to this incident. About four months prior to this incident Seema had visited her parents house and told to the complainant that Virendra accused had threatened her to kill in case she returned back to his house without Rs. 5,000/- in cash. The complainant somehow managed Rs. 2,000/- and sent his daughter back to her husbands house. It is also said that Virendra very often used to beat his daughter for non-fulfillment of his demand for dowry and at last he set her afire on the alleged date of the incident.

( 5 ) SHRIMATI Seema died in Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi. Inquest was held on the dead body of seema in Safdarjung Hospital on 25. 1. 1998 at 8. 50 A,. M. vide Inquest Report Exb. Ka-1 on record. Post mortem was conducted at the dead body of the deceased by Dr. Alexander F. Khakha on 26. 01. 10098 vide post-mortem report Exb. Ka. 9 on record.

( 6 ) DR. Alexander has been produced by the prosecution as P. W. 7, who has proved the post-mortem report Exb. Ka. 9 and stated specifically that the deceased was got admitted in safdarjung Hospital, Delhi in burnt condition and she succumoed to her injury on 25. 1. 1998 at 4. 10 A. M. According to the Doctor the Rigour mortis was present in the whole body and both the eyes were congested. Very light smell of kerosene oil was coming out of the dead body and no burn injury was there on the backside of the head and the upper ,part of the thighs. According to the doctor, 90 per cent burn injuries were noticed on *he dead body of the deceased. In the opinion of the doctor the death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result. of bum injuries.

( 7 ) AFTER lodging of the report at the Police Station Daurala, police came in action. The investigating Officer started investigation. He recorded the statement of witnesses, inspected the spot, prepared site plan and