The court clarified that unsubstantiated and general allegations of cruelty do not meet the evidENTIAL burden to uphold convictions for dowry-related offences.

1. The present appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 31-7-2008 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No. 226/2007 convicting the accused / appellants for the offence under S.498 - A and 304 - B of IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- u/S. 498 - A and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years u/S. 304 - B, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. Brief facts of the case are that marriage of the deceased Anita Bai was solemnized with appellant No. 2, Vinod Kumar in the month of March, 2005. Appellant Nos. 1, Gore Lal and appellant No. 3, Tulsi Bai are the father - in - law and mother - in - law of the deceased Anita Bai. It is alleged that on 16-7-2007 the deceased consumed some poisonous substance as a result of which she died that day itself. Merg intimation Ext. P14 was given by Chamra Sahu (PW 4) the father of the deceased and after preliminary investigation, FIR Ext. P15 was registered on 1-8-2007 against the accused persons under S.498 - A and 304 - B read with S.34 of IPC. After completion of investigation, challan was filed on 11-10-2007.

3. So as to hold the accused / appellants guilty, prosecution has examined 15 witnesses in support of its case. Statement of the accused / appellants were also recorded under S.313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which they denied the charges levelled against them and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case.

4. After hearing the parties the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused / appellants for the offence as mentioned above.

5. Contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that present is a case where unfortunately there used to be some dispute between husband and wife i.e. the appellant No.2 Vinod Kumar and the deceased Anita Bai and because of that, the deceased committed suicide. She submits that on account of death of the deceased, her parents and other relatives have made false allegations against appellants and merely on the basis of those general allegations the appellants have been convicted. Counsel for the appellants has referred the statement of Puratan Bai (PW 3), Chamra Sahu (PW 4), Kirti Sahu (PW 5), Ramesh Kumar Sahu (PW 12), Sun Bai (PW 13) and Ganga Bai (PW 14). According to her, from the reading of the statement of these witnesses it is clear that after death of Anita Bai, the deceased, they decided to falsely implicate the appellants and that is why the entire exercise has been done.

6. On the other hand supporting the impugned judgment it has been argued by the learned State Counsel that the conviction of the accused / appellants is strictly in accordance with law and there is no infirmity in the same. He submits that had the deceased not been subjected to cruelty by the appellants, she would not have died within two years of her marriage. He submits that from Ext. P5 and 6, which are the agreements between the deceased and her husband Vinod, it is clear that the couple was having serious dispute. He further submits that in the case of dowry death no leniency should be shown to the appellants and their conviction may be maintained.

7. The case of the prosecution is mainly based on the evidence of Purtan Bai (PW 3) and Chamra Sahu (PW 4) mother and father of the deceased, Ramesh Kumar Sahu (PW 12) and Kirti Sahu (PW 5) - brother and sister - in - law of the deceased, Sun Bai (PW 13) and Ganga Bai (PW 14) - neighbours of the deceased.
Puratan Bai (PW 3) - mother of the deceased in her Court statement has stated that marriage of her da