Hon’ble Akhtar Husain Khan, J.—Above three appeals have been filed against same judgement and order dated 6.2.1988 passed by Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad in S.T. No. 64 of 1986 (State v. Het Ram and others), under Sections 302/34 and 201 I.P.C., P.S. Jahanganj, District Farrukhabad. Therefore, these three appeals have been taken together and are being decided by a common judgement.

2. Aforesaid Criminal Appeal No. 322 of 1988 has been filed by accused-appellants Jageshwar, Rajvir and Smt. Sonwati, aforesaid Criminal Appeal No. 329 of 1988 has been filed by accused-appellants Het Ram, Manohar and Ramvir and aforesaid Criminal Appeal No. 476 of 1988 has been filed by accused-appellants Chhakku Lal and Dr. Shiv Kumar against aforesaid judgement and order dated 6.2.1988 passed by Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad.

Vide aforesaid impugned judgement and order, learned Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad has convicted accused-appellants Het Ram, Jageshwar, Manohar, Ramvir, Rajvir and Smt. Sonwati for offences punishable under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. and Section 201 I.P.C. and has sentenced each of them thereunder for said offences to life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment for three years respectively.

Vide aforesaid impugned judgement and order, learned Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad has convicted accused-appellants Chhakku Lal and Dr. Shiv Kumar for offence punishable under Section 201 I.P.C. and has sentenced each of them thereunder to rigorous imprisonment for three years.

Learned Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge has directed that both sentences of accused-appellants Het Ram, Jageshwar, Manohar, Ramvir, Rajvir and Smt. Sonwati shall run concurrently.

Aforesaid accused-appellant Chhakku Lal has expired during pendency of appeal. Therefore, Appeal No. 476 of 1988 stands abated in respect of him.

3. Sri Rajeev Lochan Shukla and Sri Radhey Shyam appeared for accused-appellants in appeal No. 322 of 1988 and 329 of 1988. Sri Virendra Saran and Shyam Kumar Srivastava appeared in appeal No. 476 of 1988 for surviving accused-appellant Dr. Shiv Kumar.

Learned AGA appeared in all the three appeals for respondent-State.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records of the case.

Report (Ex. Ka-1) has been lodged by complainant P.W. 1 Kishan Kali in police station Jahanganj, District Farrukhabad on 25.9.1984 ten days after incident.

In brief, according to F.I.R. (Ex. Ka-1) story of prosecution is that the complainant Kishan Kali and her cousin sister Kalpana were married with accused Rajvir and Ramvir respectively. The marriage of Kalpana with accused Ramvir was solemnized six month earlier to the incident in the month of “Fagun”. At the time of marriage Ramvir made demand of “Baja” (musical instrument), watch and cycle but father and brother of complainant could not fulfil his demand due to which members of in-laws family used to subject complainant as well as her cousin sister Kalpana to cruelty. Babu Lal cousin brother of complainant went to take his both sisters from their in-laws house, four or five days before Rakshabandhan. At that time members of in-laws family of his sisters asked him to bring “Watch, Cycle and Baja (musical instrument) before taking Bidai of his sisters. At the same time complainant as well as her sister Kalpana told Babu Lal about cruelty which were being faced by them in their in-laws house. Babu Lal brother of complainant went back to his house, thereafter, members of in-laws family continued subjecting to complainant and her cousin sister to cruelty and they were making threat to kill them, thereafter, 10 days before 25.9.1984, the date of F.I.R. (Ex. Ka.-1) on Sunday that was day of market of Kothi, at about 6.00 p.m., complainant was cooking vegetable and his sister Kalpana was filtering flour. Accused Het Ram, Jageshwar, Manoh