Hon'ble Bharat Bhushan, J.

1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.12.1997 passed by the then Sessions Judge, Deoria in Sessions Trial No. 50 of 1990 (State versus Harihar Prasad and others) whereby appellant Harihar Prasad, Vijay Kumar, Kailash Prasad and Smt. Devanti @ Damyanti were convicted under sections 304-B and 201 Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC). All of them were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of ten years' under section 304-B IPC and three years' rigorous imprisonment under section 201 IPC with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each with default stipulation. However, all the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The prosecution case is that marriage of deceased Rekha @ Baby daughter of Devi Prasad (complainant) (PW-1) was solemnized with Kailash Prasad, (appellant no. 3) son of Harihar Prasad (appellant no. 1) almost 13 months prior to the incident. The prosecution says that dowry demands were made subsequent to marriage of deceased Rekha @ Baby with Kailash Prasad. This information was allegedly communicated by the deceased to her father when he reached at her matrimonial home for Bedai. It is stated that later on, this demand was directly made to the father of the deceased when in the month of December, 1988 appellant Harihar Prasad (father-in-law of deceased), his elder son Vijay Kumar (brother-in-law of deceased), Kailash Prasad (husband of deceased) and some members of their clan went to the parental home of deceased for formally taking back the deceased to her matrimonial home. The father of the deceased sought some time to fulfil their demands. It is also alleged that a letter was also sent by Kailash Prasad, husband of the deceased, asking for a Television, Tape-Recorder and a Rajdoot motorcycle. It is stated that between the night of 27/28 of July, 1989 at about 2:30am, one Shyam Bahadur Singh (PW-3), Raghav Prasad and Vashisth Pandey (PW-2) went to the residence of Devi Prasad (PW-1)at Betia District Champaran and informed him about the death of his daughter. They informed him that his daughter had been murdered by administering poison and that her corpse had also been thrown into the river.

3. Devi Prasad, (PW-1) father of the deceased went to Megari Bazar, District Deoria, matrimonial home of deceased and inquired about her daughter from the neighbours as well as matrimonial family of his daughter. The appellants informed him that her daughter had died and last rites performed while neighbours insinuated that her daughter had been done to death by administering poison. Thereafter, PW-1 Devi Prasad lodged an First Information Report (in short, FIR). The matter was investigated. During course of investigation, some letters allegedly written by the deceased, her husband, her younger brother, her mother and her younger sister also surfaced which are available on record although authenticity of letter purported to be written by her husband Kailash Prasad has been challenged.

4. Charge-sheet was filed against 4 persons, namely, Kailash Prasad (husband), Harihar Prasad (father-in-law), Vijay Kumar (brother-in-law), Smt. Dewanti alias Damyanti (sister-in-law- Jethani). Charges were framed against all the appellants under Section 302 IPC and under sections 498-A and 201 IPC. An alternative charge under section 304-B IPC was also framed against them.

5. Prosecution examined PW-1 Devi Prasad (complainant), PW-2 Vashistha Pandey, PW-3 Shyam Bahadur Singh, PW-4 Paras Nath Yadav (Constable clerk), PW-5 Ram Ashish, PW-6 Sri Vansh Lochan Pandey, Dy. Superintendent Of Police and PW-7 Ram Bahadur. After recording statement of appellants under section 313 Cr.P.C., defence also examined several witnesses on their behalf. DW-1 Shabbir Ahmad, DW-2 Laxman Prasad, DW-3 Dr. V.K.Tiwari and DW-4 Daksh Niranjan Srivastava, hand-writing expert..

6. After considering the material on record, learned Sessions Judge convicted all the accused under sections 304-B, 201 IPC and sentenced the