Hon’ble Akhtar Husain Khan, J.—Present appeal has been filed by accused appellant Mehmood Ali under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against judgement and order dated 7.3.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 9, Moradabad in Session Trial No. 1393 of 1999 (State v. Mehmood Ali) under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 307, 323, 506 IPC and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Moradabad, whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted accused appellant Mehmood Ali for offences punishable under Section 498-A and 506 IPC as well as offence punishable under Section ¾ D.P. Act and has sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1000/- for offence under Section 498A IPC, rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500/- for offence under Section 506 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 1000/- for offence under Section 3/4 D.P. Act.

Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moradabad has further directed that in default of payment of fine accused appellant shall further undergo six months simple imprisonment. He has further ordered that all sentences of accused appellant shall run concurrently.

Sri Ali Hasan, learned counsel for accused appellant appeared. Learned A.G.A. appeared for respondent State of U.P..

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through records of the case.

In brief relevant fact for determination of this appeal is that Crime No. 01 of 1998 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 307 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act was registered in P.S. Mahila Thana, Moradabad on 5.1.1998 at 9.30 p.m. against accused appellant and four others on the basis of First Information Report Ext.Ka-1 presented by complainant Abdul Gani.

According to First Information Report Ext.Ka-1 prosecution version is that the marriage of Seema Naz alias Guddi daughter of complainant was solemnized with accused Maqsood about two and half year before occurrence. Complainant had given dowry according to his status but father-in-law, mother-in-law, husband and Jethani of complainant’s daughter were complaining for insufficient dowry and they were asking complainant’s daughter Seema Naz alias Guddi to bring Motorcycle and Rs. 10,000/- from her father. Seema Naz daughter of complainant told the complainant about their demand of dowry and told him that if he does not fulfill their demand of dowry, they shall kill her. Thereafter, complainant himself went with his brother Mohd. Hasan to the house of husband of his daughter Seema Naz about three months before occurrence and tried to convince them, whereupon they asked to pay Rs. 5,000/-.Thereafter complainant made arrangement and paid Rs. 5,000/- before Mohd. Hasan and Jakir but again after one month they started harassment of his daughter Seema Naz alias Guddi. Her daughter’s husband Maqsood, father-in-law Ahmad Ali and Jethani Shimmi started beating her and subjecting her to cruelty. Elder brother of husband of complainant’s daughter accused appellant Mehmood Ali, who was doing service in Railway also threatened daughter of complainant to kill and one day he assaulted her badly. All of them were not sending daughter of complainant to complainant’s house inspite of request of complainant.

3. According to FIR Ext.Ka-1 on 5.1.1998 at about 4.00 p.m. husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law and Jethani of complainant’s daughter set fire to complainant’s daughter after pouring kerosene oil on her and closed room from outside. After hearing noise neighbours went in the room and saw the daughter of complainant with burn injury. All the family members of complainant’s daughter’s husband family had fled away from the house. Neighbours informed complainant, whereupon complainant went to the house of her daughter and took her daughter to District Hospital and admitted her there. In FIR Ext.Ka-1 complainant has alleged that the husband, mother-in-law and Jethani of his daughter have burnt his daughter for demand of dowry.

After registration of aforesaid c