Umesh Chandra Srivastava, J.

This Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 29.11.2011 of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.-1, Mainpuri passed in Sessions Trial No. 246 of 2009, State vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma and 2 others, arising out of Case Crime no. 261 of 2009, P.S. Ghiror, District Mainpuri, whereby the appellants have been convicted under sections 304-B, 498-A I.P.C. and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act and appellant no. 2 Rambabu Sharma and appellant no. 3 Geeta Devi have been sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under section 304-B I.P.C. while appellant no. 1 Sushil Kumar Sharma has been sentenced to life imprisonment for the said offence, all appellants have been sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay Rs. 15,000/- fine each and in default to undergo three months additional simple imprisonment for the offence under section 498-A I.P.C. and further to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay Rs. 5000/- fine each and in default to undergo additional three months simple imprisonment for the offence under section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act with stipulation that all sentences of the appellants shall run concurrently.

2. Facts giving rise to appeal in brief are given as under.

3. Smt. Sunita, daughter of the first informant Ram Krishna was married to appellant no. 1 Sushil Kumar Sharma on 19.04.2003 according to Hindu rites. She died due to burns in her matrimonial home on 15.05.2009. On coming to know about the death of daughter, the first informant Ram Krishna came to matrimonial home of his deceased daughter on 16.05.2009 and lodged an F.I.R. of cruelty, dowry death and demand of dowry against appellant no. 1 Sushil Kumar Sharma, his father and appellant no. 2 Ram Babu Sharma and his mother and appellant no. 3 Smt. Geeta Devi same day at P.S. Ghiror, District mainpuri which was registered as case crime no. 461 of 2009 under sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. & ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act. In the said report the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the appellant under the aforesaid sections in the Court of concerned Magistrate who committed the case to the court of Sessions where charges under the aforesaid sections were framed which the appellants denied and claimed to be tried.

4. The prosecution examined six witnesses, namely P.W.-1 Ram Krishna, the first informant, P.W.-2 Kamlesh, brother of the deceased, P.W.-3 Constable Chunni Lal, scribe of the chick F.I.R. and G.D., P.W.-4 Nayab Tehsildar Rohtash Kumar who conducted inquest proceedings on dead body of the deceased, P.W.-5 Dr. Sudesh Kumar who conducted postmortem examination on dead body of the deceased and P.W.-6 Circle Officer Charan Singh, the Investigating Officer to prove the charges framed against the appellants.

5. Statements under section 313 Cr.P.C. of the appellant were recorded in which they admitted deceased to be the wife of appellant no. 1 Sushil Kumar Sharma, their date of marriage and also that deceased died due to burns in her matrimonial home on 15.05.2009. They, however, denied having raised the additional demand of motorcycle or any thing else from the deceased and subjected her to cruelty and killed her for the said demand being not fulfilled. They also stated that they were not present at their home when the incident took place, rather they were at their field threshing wheat at that time and that they were informed about the incident by a child at the field where after they came to their house and found that deceased was dead. They further stated that after the incident they went to police station to report the incident but the police made them to sit over there and informed the members of parental home of the deceased who then came and father of the deceased lodged report against them. Appellants also examined three witnesses, namely, D.W.-1 Deen Mohammad, D.W.-2 Brijesh and D.W.-3 Shiboo to prove their innocence.

6. The Additional Sessions Judge after havin