The court emphasized proximity between acts of cruelty and death for conviction under S.304B IPC, finding insufficient evidence for such a link while upholding conviction under S.498A IPC.

1. This revision filed on behalf of the complainant arises out of the judgment dated 20.4.2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagalpur in S.T.No.349/2006 acquitting the respondents of the charge under S.304B of IPC and convicting only respondent No.2 under S.498A of IPC and sentencing him to the period already suffered by him i.e. seven months' SI as also fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stipulation.

2. In the present case, name of the deceased is Smt. Renu Tiwari, wife of respondent No.2 Virendra @ Bablu Tiwari and daughter - in - law of respondent No,1 Smt. Saroj. Marriage of the deceased was solemnized with respondent No.2 on 8.6.2003 and she died on 24.8.2006 after suffering 90-95% burn injuries in her matrimonial house. Case of the prosecution is that immediately after marriage the deceased was subjected to cruelty, initially for demand of TV and thereafter motorcycle. As the deceased was subjected to cruelty, she left her matrimonial house and started living at her parental house where she delivered a male child. Respondent No.2 had gone to the house of parents of the deceased and after assuring the deceased that he would keep her well, brought her back to his house. However, on 24.8.2006 she suffered burn injuries, was taken to hospital where she died due to burn injuries. In the hospital on 24 8 2006 itself her dying declaration Ex.P / 10 was recorded wherein she has stated that there used to be quarrel between her and the accused persons, she was beaten by her husband and out of anger she committed the act. After recording of her dying declaration, she succumbed to burn injuries. Merg intimation Ex.P / 15 was recorded on 24.8 2006. Inquest Ex.P / 6 was prepared on 24.8.2006 and thereafter the dead body was sent for postmortem which was conducted on the same day by PW - 5 Dr. Smt. S. Nagwanshi vide Ex.P / 8 wherein she noticed 90-95% burn injuries on her person and opined that the cause of death was shock due to burn. On 26.8.2006 a written report (Ex P / 1) was made by brother of the deceased Dilip Kumar Dubey (PW - 1) mentioning therein that the deceased committed suicide as she was being subjected to cruelty for demand of dowry by the accused persons. Based on this written report, FIR (Ex.P / 2) was registered on 26.8.2006 under S.304B of IPC against the accused persons. After filing of charge sheet, the trial Court framed charge under S.304B of IPC against the accused / respondents No. 1 & 2.

3. So as to hold the accused persons guilty, the prosecution examined 17 witnesses in all. Statements of the accused were also recorded under S.313 of Cr.P.C. in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication.

4. The trial Court after hearing counsel for the respective parties and considering the material available on record, by the impugned judgment while acquitting the respondents of the charge under S.304B of IPC, convicted and sentenced respondent No.2 as mentioned above. Aggrieved by the acquittal of respondent No. 1 & 2 of the charge under S.304B of IPC, the present criminal revision has been preferred by father of the deceased.

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits as under;

(i) that the trial Court has completely ignored the evidence of PW - 1 Dilip Dubey, PW - 2 Bandhan Dubey, PW - 7 Ku. Anju Dubey and PW - 17 Indra Dubey, who have made specific allegations of cruelty against the accused persons.
(ii) even in the dying declaration (Ex.P / 10), the deceased has categorically stated that she was burnt by the accused persons, however, it has not been recorded in a proper manner and it seems that taking advantage of her burnt condition, it ha