JUDGMENT :

VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

1. This appeal under Section 372 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short ‘Cr.P.C.’), instituted by the appellant informant seeking to challenge the judgment and order dated 14.12.2018 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Faminine) Fast Tract Court-1, Mathura in Sessions Trial No. 40 of 2012 (State vs. Tejveer and Others) in Case Crime No. 218 of 2010, under Sections 498A, 201, 302, 304 IPC, P.S. Mant, District Mathura acquitting the accused opposite parties No. 2 to 8.

2. The factual matrix of the case as worded in the present appeal are that the appellant-informant being Devendra Singh son of Deshraj had submitted a written report in Police Station Mant, District Mathura with an allegation that the sister of the appellant-informant being Shreemati solemnised marriage with Tejveer son of Vijendra Singh being accused opposite party no. 2 in the year 2000.

3. As per the written report the opposite party no. 2 being Tejveer son of Vijendra Singh husband opposite party and the in-laws of the sister of the informant demanded dowry and harassed his sister pursuant whereof a first information report was lodged against the accused herein under being FIR No. 3 of 2006, under Sections 498A, 322 IPC and also Criminal Case No. 141 of 2007, under Sections 498A and 323 IPC. It has further been alleged that proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was also lodged by the sister of the informant which got registered as Case No. 502 of 2007 before the Police Station Raya. However, thereafter compromise/settlement was entered into between the parties and thereafter the informant sister being Shreemati started residing in her in-laws place. Allegation was also made to the effect that consequent to the staying of the sister of the informant in-laws place the attitude of the accused husband and the in-laws did not change and they acted in a manner which was unbecoming of husband and in-laws and the position which existed prior to lodging of the above mentioned proceedings continued.

4. As per prosecution the informant use to visit his sisters in-laws place in every two months in order to know about his sisters marital position and relationship of hers with her in-laws. As per the prosecution theory on 23.10.2010 the informant proceeded to his uncle’s (Foofa) place being Dharmpal son of Mohan Lal, who was residing near the house of her sister’s in-laws place. According to the informant in the intervening night of 23/24.10.2010, when he was sleeping in his uncle’s place then at 2.30 a.m. his uncle heard screaming of Shreemati and he woke up the informant and thereafter the informant along with his uncle Dharmpal immediately proceeded to the house of his sister and at that relevant point of times the accused herein met him as they were not sleeping and they apprised the informant that Shreemati (deceased) was having eight month pregnancy and due to certain complications they were taking the deceased to Raya hospital.

5. Accordingly, the complainant and his uncle Dharmpal apprised the in-laws of the deceased that they are proceeded to their own house and they will come in the next morning in the hospital. As per the prosecution theory on the next morning the informant along with his second uncle (Phupha), Sri Man Singh son of Sri Hari Singh along with Dharmpal proceeded to the hospital in question and when they traced the whereabouts of the deceased they could not find her thus according to the informant, the husband and the in-laws and the other accused herein have disposed of his sister Shreemati and the baby which was in the womb and hidden the dead body. It has further come on record that the first information report was lodged on 29.10.2010 before the police station Mant which was registered as Case Crime No. 218 of 2010, under Sections 304, 498A and 201 IPC against the accused herein.

6. Consequent to the l