Rajiv Sharma, J.

This appeal is instituted against the judgment and order dated 21.12.2012, rendered by learned Sessions Judge, District Tehri Garhwal, in Sessions Trial No. 10 of 2012, whereby the appellant was charged with and tried for the offences under Section 498-A, 304-B, 302 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 302 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. The appellant was also convicted and sentenced to undergo ten years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 304-B IPC. He was further convicted and sentenced to undergo two years’ rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 498-A and in default of payment of fine to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment. He was further convicted and sentenced to undergo six months’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that one Bachan Das, S/o Bag Das, R/o Village Gawana, Patti Dangar, District Tehri Garhwal has submitted a Tehrir before the Revenue Police Hisriyakhal, Tehri Garhwal with allegations that his daughter Smt. Rameshwari was married with the appellant as per Hindu Rites and Rituals. One daughter was born out of the wedlock. The appellant and his mother and sister-in-law used to harass and administer beatings to his daughter. His daughter used to complain about the maltreatment meted out to her by her in-laws. Whenever she visited her parents house, they used to demand dowry. On 23.12.2011, at midnight, the in-laws of his daughter killed her for dowry. He received the information on 25.12.2011 at 07:30 hours. The appellant has never informed him. The FIR was registered. The inquest report was prepared. Thereafter, the dead body was sent for postmortem examination. The cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia due to strangulation. The matter was investigated and the challan was put up against the accused after completing all the codal formalities.

3. The prosecution has examined as many as ten witnesses in its support.

4. The statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. He has denied the case of the prosecution. He has taken the plea of alibi. The appellant was convicted and sentenced, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, the present appeal.

5. Learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has supported the judgment and order dated 21.12.2012.

6. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the judgment and record very carefully.

7. PW1 Smt. Budhi Devi is the mother of the deceased. According to her, the marriage of her daughter was solemnized with the appellant in the month of Mangsir prior four years prior to her death. The appellant, his mother and his sister-in-law were residing in the house. They were present in the house at the time of her daughter’s death. She was harassed by Chandra Devi, Shanti Devi and by her husband for dowry. They were demanding Rs.50,000/-. Her daughter had come three days before Deepawali. In the evening, she told that her in-laws were demanding Rs.50,000/-, failing which she would be killed. She also met her maternal uncle when she was coming to her parental house. She complained about the same to her maternal uncle. She stayed overnight with them. Two months later, she died. They were told about the death by the Pradhan of the village. Her husband, her brother and co-villagers went to her daughter’s in-laws village. Her daughter died on 23rd. They received the information on 25th. Her husband came back on 26th and told her t