ORDER

1. Being aggrieved by the judgment passed by First Additional sessions Judge, Shahdol, in Sessions Trial No.12/1998 on 26.10.1998, this appeal was preferred by appellant Keshaw Yadav (A1) and Chhanga Yadav (A2) to challenge their conviction under section 304 Part II read with section 34 IPC and a sentence of rigorous imprisonment of five years. Both the appellants were granted the benefit of suspension of sentence and bail, under order dated 15.12.1998 by this Court but later they defaulted appearance, hence bailable warrants were issued against them vide order dated 12.7.2023. In the service report of bailable warrant of arrest issued against Keshaw Yadav (A1), Police Station, Amlai, district Shahdol, submitted the information regarding his death, therefore in the absence of any application for substitution of legal representatives, this criminal appeal was declared to have been abated qua Keshaw Yadav (A1) and now this criminal appeal is being decided qua Chhanga Yadav (A2) only.

2. Facts necessary for the decision of this criminal appeal are that Chhanga Yadav was the brother-in-law of deceased Rambha Yadav who was married to Keshaw Yadav, the deceased-appellant, and ever since her marriage she was being harassed physically and mentally by her mother-in-law Smt. Ramrati, her husband Keshaw and her brother -in-law Chhanga in relation to dowry which was being demanded by these persons; it was claimed that on many occasions Rambha Yadav was beaten brutally, given electric currents, caused burn injuries and also shaved by these persons; it is further claimed that she used to be taken to her parental house for recovery and after return to matrimonial house, she used to be again given similar treatment; it was also claimed that appellant Chhanga Yadav used to sexually harass her; according to FIR, many complaints were made by Rambha during her lifetime but police did not take any action against her in-laws.

3. According to FIR, on 17.5.1997, Rambha was brutally beaten by her mother-in-law, husband and brother-in-law and on account of this brutality she sustained fatal wounds and succumbed to her injury; the matter was reported by an independent person, namely Anup Mukherji alias Anup, by submitting a written complaint to Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Anuppur, on 17.5.1997 upon which FIR was registered in Police Station, Anuppur, district Shahdol, at Crime No.78/1997 for the offence of section 304-B read with section 34 IPC and the matter was investigated. After completion of investigation the charge-sheet was filed and upon conclusion of trial the Court below acquitted Smt. Ramrati, the mother-in-law of deceased, and recording the acquittal of husband Keshaw Yadav and brother-in-law Chhanga Yadav for the offence of section 304-B IPC, alternatively sections 302 (302/34) and 498-A IPC, convicted them for the offence of section 304 Part II read with section 34 IPC and sentenced them as aforesaid.

4. Arguing this appeal on behalf of Chhanga Yadav (A2), it is submitted that the impugned judgment is against the facts of the case and also the settled principles of law; appellant was innocent and did not cause any injury to the victim; the learned trial Judge completely ignored material contradictions and omissions present in the testimony of material witnesses; it was ignored that the victim was anemic and there was no clear medical opinion that she died on account of injuries found on her person; the testimony of defence witness (D.W.1) was totally ignored; despite the failure of prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts, the trial Court convicted the appellant. A request has, therefore, been made to allow this appeal and setting aside the conviction as well as sentence, appellant Chhanga Yadav be acquitted.

5. Counsel for appellant Chhanga Yadav (A2) and also the counsel for State have been heard on the merits of this criminal appeal and the record has been perused.

6. From the record of trial Court, it is evident that prose