JUDGMENT :

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

2. The instant criminal appeal has been filed with the prayer to set aside/quash the impugned judgment and order dated 5.4.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Shahjahanpur in Sessions Trial No.338 of 2014 (State v. Anil & Anr.) (arising out of Crime No.175 of 2014, under Sections 304, 452, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station-Sadar Bazar, District-Shahjahanpur and to acquit the appellants.

3. Brief facts as culled out from the record are that the informant-Kandhai submitted a written report to the Superintendent of Police-Shahjahanpur, on the basis of which, F.I.R. was registered at Police Station-Sadar Bazar, District-Shahjahanpur. It is stated in the aforesaid report that daughter of the informant namely Rajbeti used to reside in a separate house with her husband. On 25.11.2013 at about 10:00 p.m., Govind, Suraj and Anil all real brothers entered the house of her daughter and set her ablaze by pouring kerosene oil. It is also stated in the report that the son of informant Rajesh and Budhpal s/o Amarpal and informant himself saw them coming out from the house and running. Smt. Kiran who is daughter-in-law of his daughter was having illicit relations with the aforesaid Suraj to which the informant's daughter Rajbeti objected several times. Rajbeti was admitted to hospital on 25.11.2013 in burning condition where she died on 01.12.2013 during the course of treatment. On the basis of the aforesaid report, the Case Crime No.175 of 2014 was registered at police station. The investigation was taken up by the Investigating Officer during which he visited the spot before the site plan. The dying-declaration of the injured/deceased Rajbeti was recorded by the Additional District Magistrate in hospital on 27.11.2013. The statements of witnesses were recorded by the Investigation Officer under Section 313 Cr.P.C.. After the death of the deceased, inquest proceedings were conducted and inquest report was prepared. The concerned doctor conducted the post-mortem on the dead-body and prepared the post-mortem report. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer only against two accused persons Anil and Smt. Kiran and other named accused Suraj and Jagdish were not charge-sheeted because no evidence was found against them. The case being triable exclusively by the court of sessions was committed by the Magistrate to the sessions court.

4. Learned trial court framed charges against the accused Anil and Smt. Kiran under Sections 452, 304 read with Section 34, 120-B and 506 I.P.C. The accused persons denied the charges and came to be tried. The prosecution examined the following witnesses:-

5. To bring on the charges, apart from the aforesaid oral testimony, the prosecution filed the following documentary evidence also which was proved by leading the evidence:-

6. After completion of prosecution evidence, the statement of accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. No evidence was adduced by the accused persons in their defence.

7. After hearing both the parties learned trial court convicted Smt. Kiran for the offence under Section 304/34 IPC and awarded sentence for ten years with fine, under Section 120-B IPC and awarded 10 years with fine. The trial court convicted accused Anil under Section 304/34 IPC for life imprisonm