Point of Law :
To attract the provisions of Section 212 of IPC, it is necessary to establish a commission of an offence, harbouring or concealing the person known or believed to be the offender, and such concealment must be with the intention of screening him from legal punishment

JUDGMENT:

Feeling aggrieved by the judgment, dated 24.03.2005, passed by the V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (Mahila Court), Hyderabad in Sessions Case No.445 of 2003, the appellants - Accused Nos.1 to 3 preferred the present appeal.

2. Vide the aforesaid judgment, the trial Court found the appellant - accused No.1 guilty of the charge punishable under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), while the appellants - accused Nos.2 and 3 of the charge punishable under Sections 498-A of IPC. However, accused No.4 was not found guilty of any of the above charges. Accordingly, the trial Court sentenced accused No.1 to undergo ten (10) years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of fine amount, to undergo five (05) months simple imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 304-B of IPC, while accused Nos.2 and 3 were sentenced to undergo two (02) years rigorous imprisonment each and to pay fine amount of Rs.3,000/- each and in default of fine, to undergo three (03) months simple imprisonment each for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC.

3. It is relevant to note that appellant No.1 is the husband and appellant Nos.2 and 3 are in-laws of deceased - Sarika Bai, while accused No.4, who was acquitted, is sister of accused No.2.

4. The case of the prosecution is as under:

(i) The marriage of deceased - Smt. Sarika Bai was performed with accused No.1 on 10.05.2000 and it is an arranged marriage. At the time of marriage, parents of the deceased gave 15 tolas of gold, furniture and clothes.

(ii) The deceased and accused No.1 lived together happily for a period of five months and, thereafter, all the appellants – accused started harassing the deceased physically and mentally by demanding additional dowry of Rs.50,000/- and one motorcycle. They have also driven her out from matrimonial house twice with the above said demand. The accused have also threatened the deceased that if she fails to fulfill the above demand, they would perform second marriage of accused No.1 with another girl.

(iii) About 12 days prior to 24.06.2003, the deceased came to her parents house and stayed there informing that the accused persons were harassing her for the aforesaid demand. On 24.06.2003, the parents of the deceased along with her maternal uncles went to the matrimonial house of the deceased, dropped the deceased there and requested the accused not to harass the deceased and informed them that they cannot meet the said demand. They have also informed the accused that they are poor and not in a position to meet the said demand. But, the accused did not agree for the same and warned them that they would perform marriage of accused No.1 with another girl if they fail to accede to their demand.

(iv) While so, in the intervening night of 25/26-06-2003 at about 11:45 p.m., Shankar Singh, son of maternal uncle of the deceased, came and informed the parents of the deceased that the deceased committed suicide by hanging. On coming to know the same, the parents of the deceased went to the matrimonial house of the deceased and found the dead-body of the deceased lying on the floor. Then, mother of the deceased went to the police station on 26.06.2003 at 00:55 hours and gave oral report about the death of her daughter, on which her statement was reduced into writing by the police, wherein she narrated about the harassment meted out by the accused on her daughter for bringing additional dowry and motorcycle that ultimately made the deceased to commit suicide.

(v) The police registered a case in Crime No.186 of 2003 under Section 304-B of IPC and investigated into the matter.

5. On completion of investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offence under Section 304-B of IPC. The same was taken on file vide S.C. No.445 of 2003 for the said offence.

6. The trial Court framed charge under Section 304-B of IPC against the appellants and accused No.4. The appellants - accused Nos.