JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A. G. A. for the State.

2. These two criminal appeals have been filed by Fakir Chandra and Smt. Rammurti, appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 3251 of 2016 and Raghuvir, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 3524 of 2016 against the judgment and order dated 27.5.2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Rampur in S. T. No. 12 of 2013; State Versus Fakir Chandra and two others, arising out of Case Crime No.1353 of 2011, under Sections-498A, 304B and 307 I.P.C. and Sections-3/4 of D. P. Act by which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life u/s 302/34 I.P.C.

3. Briefly stated facts of this case are that marriage between Renu, D/o the first informant, Smt. Kusum, widow of late Dara Singh, R/o Gram-Mathurapur Kalan, P. S.-Patwai, District-Rampur was solemnized with one Bhagwat Saran, S/o Fakirchandra, R/o Dolsar Matwali, P. S.-Palwai, District-Rampur about two years before the occurrence, which had taken place on 3.11.2011, according to Hindu rites and customs. P.W.1 informant Smt. Kusum had given sufficient dowry at the time of marriage of her daughter comprising of Splendour Motorcycle, coloured television, fridge, ornaments and Rs. 1,00,000/-in cash. The attitude of her husband and his relatives towards her daughter remained normal for sometime after the marriage. In the interregnum, she gave birth to a male child, who was about eight months old on the date of incident. Thereafter her husband, Bhagwat Saran, father-in-law Fakirchandra, mother-in-law Smt. Rammurti, brother-in-law (jeth) Raghubir, sister-in-law (jethani) Maldei and sister-in-law (nanad) Kusum started demanding Rs. 50,000/-cash and one buffalo as additional dowry. Her daughter communicated their demands, on which P.W.1 informant Smt. Kusum tried to make her daughter understand that she was not in a position to fulfil the additional demands of dowry and that with the passage of time, things will normalise and she then sent her daughter back to her matrimonial home but there was no change in the attitude of her husband and his relatives and they started torturing her daughter for non-fulfilment of the demands of additional dowry. Informant’s daughter Renu informed her on 1.11.2011 that her husband and his other relatives were threatening her with dire consequences in case, their demands were not fulfilled. She again expressed her inability to fulfil their demands. On 3.11.2011, his son-in-law and his other relatives informed him that her daughter had received burn injuries at about 12.00 hours mid-night and she was being taken to Sadar Hospital, Rampur. On receiving the aforesaid information, P.W.1 informant Smt. Kusum reached Sadar Hospital, Rampur along with her relatives and when she enquired from her daughter about how she had received burn injuries, she told her that her husband, Bhagwat Saran, father-in-law Fakir Chandra, mother-in-law Smt. Rammurti, brother-in-law (jeth) Raghubir, sister-in-law (jethani) Maldei and sister-in-law (nanad) Kusum on account of non-fulfilment of additional demands of dowry had set her ablaze after pouring kerosene oil on her.

4. Narrating the aforesaid facts, P.W.1 informant Smt. Kusum gave a written report (Ext. Ka 1) at P. S.-Palwai, District-Rampur on 6.11.2011 at about 7.50 A. M. on the basis of which, Case Crime No. 1353 of 2011 under Sections-498A, 304B and 307 I.P.C. and Sections-3/4 of D. P. Act was registered against the deceased’s husband Bhagwat Saran, father-in-law Fakir Chandra, mother-in-law Smt. Rammurti, brother-in-law (jeth) Raghubir, sister-in-law (jethani) Maldei and sister-in-law (nanad) Kusum. Chek F.I.R. Ext. Ka 10 and the corresponding G. D. entry vide rapat No. 13, dated 6.11.2011 (Ext. Ka 11) were prepared by P.W.6 Rajendra Singh. The deceased Renu was examined by P.W.11 Dr. Arvind Kumar on 6.11.2011 at 8.37 P. M. in the emergency ward of District Hospital, Rampur. Considering her serious cond