State of Chhattisgarh vs Murlidhar Agrawal and Another

I.M. Quddusi, J.—The present appeal arises out of the judgment dated 5th May, 2003, passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in Sessions Trial No. 73/2001, acquitting the accused/respondents of the charges under Sections 304B and in the alternate u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Brief facts of the case, as per the prosecution story, are that deceased Nisha Agarwal was married to the son of the accused/respondents, namely Manoj Kumar, on 23rd April, 2000. According to the list given by the parents of the boy the parents of the girl had given articles worth Rs. 1,00,000/- approximately and had expended about Rs. 2,00,000/- in solemnization of the marriage. After marriage deceased Nisha had been living in her matrimonial house at Raigarh, however, due to death of uncle of her father, she went to her parental house and thereafter, after three-four days, she returned to her matrimonial house along-with her husband. In the month of Shravan she came to her parental house and after staying for about one month she returned to her matrimonial house with her brother Sharad Agarwal. During the period of about one month when deceased was staying in her parental house she remains sad. On being asked by her parents she told that her in-laws are giving trouble to her and they have asked to bring Rs. 50,000/- for construction of their home. The father of the deceased told the deceased that he is not in a position to give such a huge amount, however, at the time of her departure to her matrimonial house the deceased was given Rs. 2000 - by her parents. After 4-5 days from the date of the deceased''s reaching to her matrimonial house, her father-in-law (accused/respondent No. 1 Murlidhar) made a phone call to the father of the deceased (Vijay Kumar Agarwal) expressing his displeasure and stated that merely sending of Rs. 2000/- would not serve the purpose therefore he is sending back the amount of Rs. 2000/- through bank draft and accordingly he had returned the amount of Rs. 2000/- through bank draft. After 2-4 days from the date of receiving the bank draft, the father of the deceased talked to his daughter (deceased) on phone to know the situation in which the deceased had told her father to come to her matrimonial house and have a talk with her in-laws i.e. father-in-law and mother-in-law. On 30.9.2000 at about 7.00 p.m. in the evening accused/respondent No. 1 informed Rajendra Kumar Agarwal (P.W. 1), who is real uncle of the deceased, that Nisha has sustained burn injuries. After receiving this information Rajendra Kumar Agarwal (P.W. 1), Vijay Kumar Agarwal (P.W. 2), Savitri Devi (PW-12 mother of the deceased), Suresh and Sushila Devi (paternal aunt) went to Raigarh where they reached at about 12.00 a.m. in the night and found Nisha is dead. Her dead body was lying in front of the kitchen and the body was covered by a cloth.

On the information given by the accused/respondent No. 1 to the police station-Kotwali Raigarh the merg intimation (Ex. P/12) was recorded, the panchnama of the dead body was prepared and it was sent to the district hospital, Raigarh for autopsy, where the autopsy was conducted by Dr. Lokesh Shadangi (P.W. 4) and Dr. D.K. Toppo (P.W. 14). After the autopsy some articles like burnt pieces of clothing, two slice made of the pieces of liver, kidney, heart and intestine were kept in sealed packet and were sent for forensic examination.

During the investigation statement of the witnesses were recorded, site map was prepared, the ornaments of the deceased were kept in a sealed packet and some articles were seized from the place of incident. Finding substance in the allegations made against the accused/respondents, on 3.10.2000 Crime No. 460/2000 and F.I.R. (Ex. P. 16) relating to the offence were registered. Thereafter, further investigation was conducted and statements of the witnesses were recorded u/s 161 of the Cr. P.C. After completing investigation the challan was filed by the police on 1.1.2001 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raigarh wherein it was mentioned that the accused/respondent No. 1 is in custody, whereas accused/respondent No. 2 is absconding, however, she had surrendered to custody on 14.3.2001.

Thereafter, the matter was committed to the Sessions Court where the charge u/s 304B and in the alternative u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code were framed against both the accused persons. The accused persons denied the charge and prayed for trial.

Learned trial Court having regard to the facts situation and the evidence on record passed the impugned judgment on 5th May, 2003, acquitting both the accused persons of the charges.

We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused " the records.

On perusal of the papers on record it is clear that there is no eyewitness to the incident and the entire case of the prosecution rests on the medical evidence as well as the circumstantial evidence.

In order to bring home the guilt of the accused persons the prosecution has examined the following witnesses:

Rajendra Kumar Agarwal (P.W. 1) - Uncle of the deceased.

Vijay Kumar Agarwal (P.W. 2) - Father of the deceased.

Deep Mala Agarwal (P.W. 3) - younger Sister of the deceased.

Dr. Lokesh Shadangi (P.W. 4) - Medical Officer, who conducted the autopsy.

Mithilesh Kumar Donde (P.W. 5) - Naib Tahsildar, who prepared the Panchnama of the body.

Jai Lai Jaiswal (P.W. 6) - Constable, who had taken the photographs of the dead body and site.

Mangli Bai (P.W. 7) - Maidservant of the accused persons.

Chameli Devi (P.W. 8) - Wife of real elder brother of the accused/respondent No. 1, who was residing on the ground floor of the same house where the accused persons were residing on the first floor.

Anant Ram Sahu (P.W. 9) - A.S.I. who recorded the merg intimation No. 89/2000 at 10.30 p.m. in the night.

Kaushalya Sahu (P.W. 10) - S.I. who prepared the site map and conducted the investigation.

Rajiv Sharma (P.W. 11) - Constable who registered the crime and arrested the accused/respondent No. 1.

Savitri Devi (P.W. 12) - Mother of the deceased.

Kamal Lochan Kashyap (P.W. 13) - City Police Superintendent, who prepared the absconding panchnama and got recorded the statement of witnesses.

Dr. Divya Kiran Toppo (P.W. 14) - who conducted the autopsy ?

On examining the evidence of the prosecution witnesses it is evident that at about 7.00 p.m. the accused/respondent No. 1 had informed the police station on phone as well as parents of the deceased about burning of the deceased. However, according to Mangli Bai (P.W. 7), maidservant of the accused persons, on the fateful day of the incident at about 4.00 p.m. she went to their house for working, she stayed there up to 6.00 p.m. and at the time of-her departure she had seen that the deceased and the respondent No. 2 (mother-in-law) were taking tea together.

The wife of elder brother of the accused No. 1, who is living on the ground floor of the same house, namely Chameli Devi (P.W. 8) in her statement has stated that on the date of the incident, as usual, she went to the Anathalaya Temple in the evening, however, she was not in a position to tell the exact time, as to when she had returned to her home on that day. She further stated that after about one hour of her return from the temple she had heard the'' voice of accused/respondent No. 2 and suspected that something must have happened in the house of respondent No. 2 and therefore she had climbed some steps to the first floor, however, she returned back to her home without seeing as to what had happened. In her cross examination she has categorically stated that she did not saw the accused/respondent No. 2 in the temple on the fateful day and she does not know whether the accused/respondent No. 2 had also returned from the temple after 10-15 minutes of her returning to home. The temple is about one kilometer away from the house of the accused persons. Thereafter, after about half to one hour, when the police reached to the place of incident she could know that Nisha has died on account of burning.

The defence of the accused persons is that the accused No. 1 was in his shop and the accused No. 2 had gone to temple. While she returned home from temple she had seen that Nisha had burnt and therefore she informed the accused No. 1 on phone and thereafter accused No. 1 reached home and intimated the police as well as the parents of the deceased at about 7.00 p.m. about the incident.

So far as demand of dowry i.e. Rs. 50,000/- is concerned, father of the deceased Vijay Kumar Agarwal (P.W. 2) has categorically stated that since he had not given Rs. 50,000/- to her daughter to take the amount to her matrimonial house and only gave Rs. 2000/-, the accused No. 1 had expressed his displeasure on phone and had returned the amount of Rs. 2000/- by way of bank draft, however, no copy or number of the bank draft is brought on record. This version of P.W. 2 gets support from the statements of the prosecution witnesses Rajendra Kumar Agarwal (P.W. 1), Deep Mala Agarwal (P.W. 3) and Savitri Devi (P.W. 12) with the only difference that P.W. 12 (mother of the deceased) has stated that mother-in-law of the deceased made a phone call expressing her displeasure about sending the meager amount. It may be possible that on phone the accused No. 1 must have talked to the father of the deceased and the accused No. 2 must have also talked to the mother of the deceased.

It is evident from the report dated 1.10.2000 (Ex. P/2-A) that tongue of the deceased was protruding, waist was covered by a cloth, half burnt pieces of clothes were there on the body of the deceased, the underwear and piece of Sari of the deceased were not burnt, the braid (hair bunch) and rubber band on the braid were not burnt, stool had come out of the anus. However, both legs of the deceased from toe to knee had not burnt. From the seizure memo (Ex. P/3) it is evident that one burnt match stick (not the match box), some ashes, two steel Sari pins and one bottle containing some liquid like kerosene oil etcetera were recovered. It is not sustainable that had the deceased herself tried to pour kerosene oil on her body in order to burn herself and put on fire by match box, as to how the match box could not be recovered and as to how instead of laying down of the bottle of kerosene on the floor, it was recovered from the almirah. It is also not sustainable that all the articles in the kitchen and the room were kept in order and none of them was found disturbed or placed here or there on the floor etc.

From the perusal of the site map (Ex. P/13) which was prepared on 1.10.2000 it is evident that the place of incident is adjacent to the main road. On the ground floor the family of elder brother of the accused No. 1 was living and on the first floor the family of the accused persons was living. It is a prudent view that if anyone pours kerosene on him and sets himself on fire, undoubtedly there are chances that the burning person may go here and there in the room or raise some voice before his death is occurred. However, there were no such signs on the place of incident which are sufficient to suggest that it must be a case where death was caused before she was putting to burns and after committing murder the deceased was put on fire to show that she has put herself on fire, making it a case of suicidal or accidental death by burn.

As per the postmortem report the cause of death is ante-mortem burn, mode of death is asphyxia, it was opined that the nature of death can be ascertained by circumstantial evidence, and time has elapsed since death was within 12 to 24 hours at the time of postmortem. The postmortem was conducted on 1.10.2000. Dr. Lokesh Shadangi (P.W. 4) in his statement has deposed that the body of the deceased was burnt to the extent of 96%, however, lower portion of the leg from toe to knee at the frontal side were not burnt. The body was in such a burnt condition that it was not possible to see the external injuries, if any. On the fingers of the hand and legs there were bluish. The tongue of the deceased was coming out of the mouth and turned into black colour. Some food-grain pieces and liquid was coming out of the mouth and nose, stool was coming out of the anus and there was vaginal discharge of white colour. Half of the portion of the hair of head was burnt but there was no smell of kerosene etc. In the cross examination only one question was put by the defence and this witness has categorically stated that the body was burnt to such an extent that it was not possible at all to gather the external injuries on any of the portion of the body. Similar statement has been given by Dr. Divya Kiran Toppo (P.W. 14) who had conducted the autopsy along with the P.W. 4.

The provisions of Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code reads as under:

304B. Dowry death.--(1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called "dowry death", and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death.

Explanation.--For the purpose of this sub-section, "dowry" shall have the same meaning as in section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961).

(2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment fro a term which shall not be les than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.

Hon''ble Supreme Court in Baljeet Singh and Another Vs. State of Haryana, after quoting the provisions of Section 304B of the IPC, in para 8 has held thus : " A perusal of this section clearly shows that if a married woman dies otherwise than under normal circumstances within 7 years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband in connection with demand for dowry, such death shall be called "dowry death" and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused the death. The conditions precedent for establishing an offence under this Section are as follows : (a) that a married woman had died otherwise than under normal circumstances, (b) such death was within 7 years of her marriage; (c) and the prosecution has established that there was cruelty and harassment in connection with demand for dowry soon before her death."

In the instant case, as has been indicated in the forgoing paragraphs, the deceased had died otherwise than under normal circumstances. The marriage was solemnized on 23rd April, 2000 and deceased Nisha Agarwal is said to have died of 96% burn injuries in abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial house on 30.9.2000 i.e. within seven years of her marriage. From the statement of the prosecution witnesses it is evident that persistent demand of Rs. 50,000/- was being made by the accused persons (father-in-law and mother-in-law) and for that reason there was a pressure on the deceased causing mental agony and harassment. When she took only Rs. 2000/- from her parental house to her matrimonial house the accused persons did not accept that meager amount and while talking on phone with the parents of the deceased, the accused persons had stated that they are sending back the amount of Rs. 2000/- through bank draft, which must have resulted in insult of the parents of the deceased, amounting a cruelty to the deceased. From the statements of the witnesses it is reflected that later on the accused persons had send the money through bank draft, though no documentary proof in this regard is produced by the prosecution.

From perusal of the entire statements of the prosecution witnesses it is evident that the marriage was solemnized on 23rd April 2000 and in the marriage the parents of the deceased had given certain articles worth Rs. 1,00,000/- and spent about Rs. 2,00,000/- in solemnization of the marriage. After marriage the deceased was residing in her matrimonial house. Thereafter she went to her parental house and stayed only for 3- 4 days. In the month of Savan (July-August) the deceased was brought to her parental home by her brother where she stayed for about one month. During the above one month''s period the deceased was living lonely feeling some-sorrow in her mind and on asking for the reason the deceased had told to her parents that her in-laws creates problem for her and her mother-in-law has directed to bring Rs. 50,000/-. While going to her matrimonial house after staying for about one month in her parental house the deceased was given Rs. 2000/- by her parents. About 4-5 days thereafter the accused persons talked on phone with the parents of the deceased and said that they will return the meager amount of Rs. 2000/- by bank draft. Afterwards the money was sent to the father of the deceased through bank draft, 2-3 days thereafter. After 2-4 days of receiving of the bank draft by the father of the deceased, her father gave a phone call to the deceased to know about her situation in her matrimonial house then the deceased replied to her father to please come to her matrimonial house and have talk with her in-laws/accused persons. About 10 days prior to the date of the incident the father of the deceased informed her on phone that he is making arrangement of the amount of Rs. 50,000/-. In order to make arrangement of the sum of Rs. 50,000/- the father of the deceased also requested for help to his brother. On 30th September, 2000 Nisha Agarwal died in abnormal circumstances. No explanation is offered by the accused persons about the cause of death of the deceased in abnormal circumstances. Nisha Agarwal died within about five months and one week (23rd April to 30th September, 2000) from the date of her marriage. In the month of Savan (July-August) the deceased stayed for about one month in her parental house and thereafter she went to her matrimonial house taking with her the meager amount of Rs. 2000/-. Thereafter the incident had occurred within one month and during this period the accused persons talked with the parents of the deceased showing their anger about sending of meager amount of Rs. 2000/-, they returned the amount through bank draft, father of the deceased assured the deceased on phone that he is making arrangement to get money of Rs. 50,000/- and in the month of Bhado (August-September) the father of the deceased also sought help from his brother for making arrangement of Rs. 50,000/-.

The deceased died in absolute abnormal circumstances. The tongue of the deceased was coming out of the mouth, stool was also corning out of the anus, her legs were not burnt below the knee from the frontal portion, some back portion was not burnt, the hair was half burnt, food stuffs were coming out of the nostrils, although the body was burnt to the extent of 96% but it was not extensively burnt all over the body and cause of death was asphyxia. No smell of kerosene was found by the doctors conducting the postmortem and since there was facility of cooking gas, there was no need for the deceased to use the Kerosene stove. The bottles of kerosene were kept in almirah, which suggests that the same must have been placed there at. Therefore, it can be safely held that there was cruelty and harassment in connection with demand for dowry soon before the death of the deceased.

The provisions of Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as under:

113A. Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman - When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the Court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband.

Section 304B applies not only when death is caused by her husband or in-laws but also when death occurs unnaturally whoever might have caused it. The section will apply whenever the occurrence of death is preceded by cruelty or harassment by husband or in-laws for dowry and death occurs in unnatural circumstances. It may be emphasized that occurrence of death in such circumstances is enough though death might not have been in fact caused by the husband or in-laws. Thus the intention behind the section is to fasten death sentence on the husband or in-laws even though they did not in fact cause the death. Thus a fiction has been created. It is because in these circumstances, the misery and agony created thereby which compels the unfortunate married woman to end her life.

Hon''ble Supreme Court in Vijay Kumar Arora Vs. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi, , wherein deceased-wife died in abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial house by almost 100 per cent burn injuries, has observed that "Normally, a woman committing suicide will leave a suicidal note. But it is nobody''s case that any suicidal note written by the deceased was found after she had received burn injuries. Paragraph 41 of the judgment reads as under:

The evidence of Ram Nath Mehra who is the father of the deceased would indicate that the deceased was subjected to physical and mental cruelty for bringing insufficient dowry. According to the said witness, he had given dowry worth Rs. 75,000/- to the appellant and his family members at the time of marriage of the deceased. On one occasion, the deceased was asked to bring a gold set for her mother-in-law but the witness was not able to make arrangement of the funds for gold set and had, therefore, purchased a gold chain and had given it to the appellant. His evidence further shows that the appellant had demanded a scooter from the deceased and he was not able to meet the said demand of the appellant because of his weak financial conditions.

The evidence of B.L. Sharma, P.W. 6, who is a friend of the father of the deceased shows that in order to fulfill the demands made by the appellant, the father of the deceased had sought financial assistance from him but he could not render any financial help to the father of the deceased because of his own weak financial conditions. The testimony of the father of the deceased regarding physical and mental cruelty meted out to his daughter gets corroboration from the testimony of the mother of the deceased and the sister of the deceased.

Hon''ble Supreme Court in Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam and Another Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, in paragraphs 25 and 26 held as under:

Of late there has been an alarming increase in cases relating to harassment, torture, abetted suicides and down-deaths of young innocent brides. This growing cult of violence and exploitation of the young brides, though keeps'' on sending shock waves to the civilized society whenever it happens, continues unabated. There is a constant erosion of the basic human values of tolerance and the spirit of "live and let live". Lack of education and economic dependence of women have encouraged the greed perpetrators of the crime. It is more disturbing and sad that in most of such reported cases it is the woman who plays a pivotal role in this crime against the younger woman, as in this case, with the husband either acting as a mute spectator or even an active participant in the crime, in utter disregard of his matrimonial obligations. In many cases, it has been noticed that the husband, even after marriage, continues to be ''Mamma''s baby'' and the umbilical cord appears not to have been cut even at that stage! We are here tempted to recall the observations of R.N. Mishra, J. (as His Lordship then was) in State (Delhi Administration) v. Laxman Kumar while dealing with a bride burning case. It was observed: (SCC pp. 507-08, paras 55 and 56)

Marriage, according to the community to which parties belong, is sacramental and is believed to have been ordained in heaven. The religious rites performed at the marriage altar clearly indicate that the man accepts the woman as his better-half by assuring her protection as guardian, ensuring food and necessaries of lift as the provider, guaranteeing companionship as the mate and by resolving that the pleasures and sorrows in the pursuit of life shall be shared with her and Dharma shall be observed. If this be the concept of marriage, there would be no scope to look for worldly considerations, particularly dowry.

When a girl is transplanted from her natural setting into an alien family, the care expected is bound to be more than in the case of a plant. Plant has life but the girl has a more developed one. Human emotions are unknown to the plant life. In the growing years in the natural setting the girl-now a bride-has formed her own habits, gathered her own impressions, developed her own aptitudes and got used to a way of life. In the new setting some of these have to be accepted and some she has to surrender. This process of adaptation is not and cannot be one-sided. Give and take, live and let live, are the ways of life and when the bride is received in the new family she must have a feeling of welcome and by the fond bonds of love and affection, grace and generosity, attachment and consideration that she may receive in the family of the husband, she will get into a new mould; the mould which would last for her life. She has to get used to a new set of relationships-one type with the husband, another with the parents-in-law, a different one with the other superiors and yet a different one with the younger ones in the family. For this she would require loving guidance. The elders in the family, including the mother-in-law, are expected to show her the way. The husband has to stand as a mountain of support ready to protect her and espouse her cause where she is on the right and equally ready to cover her either by pulling her up or protecting her willingly taking the responsibility on to himself when she is at fault. The process has to be a natural one and there has to be exhibition of cooperation and willingness from every side. Otherwise how would the transplant succeed!.

Awakening of the collective consciousness if the need of the day. Change of heart and attitude is what is needed. If man were to regain his harmony with others and replace hatred, greed, selfishness and anger by mutual love, trust and understanding and if woman were to receive education and become economically independent, the possibility of this pernicious social evil dying a natural death may not remain a dream only. The legislature, realizing the gravity of the situation has amended the laws and provided for stringent punishments in such cases and even permitted the raising of presumptions against an accused in cases of unnatural deaths of the brides within the first seven years of their marriage. The Dowry Prohibition Act was enacted in 1961 and has been amended from time to time, but this piece of social legislation, keeping in view the growing menace of the social evil, also does not appear to have served much purpose as dowry seekers are hardly brought to book and convictions recorded are rather few. Laws are not enough to combat the evil. A wider social movement of educating women of their rights, to conquer the menace, is what is needed more particularly in rural areas where women are still largely uneducated and less aware of their rights and fall an easy prey to their exploitation. The role of courts, under the circumstances assumes greater importance and it is expected that the courts would deal with such cases in a more realistic manner and not allow the criminals to escape on account of procedural technicalities or insignificant lacunae in the evidence as "otherwise the criminals would receive encouragement and the victims of crime would be totally discouraged by the crime going unpunished. The courts are expected to be sensitive in cases involving crime against women. The verdict of acquittal made by the trial court in this case is an apt illustration of the lack of sensitivity on the part of the trial court. It recorded the verdict of acquittal on mere surmises and conjectures and disregarded the evidence of the witnesses for wholly insufficient and insignificant reasons. It ignored the vital factors of the case without even properly discussing the same.

Hon''ble Supreme Court in a recent decision in Criminal Appeal No. 851/2010 (Rajesh Bhatnagar Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Criminal Appeal No. 850/2010 (Mukesh Bhatnagar Vs. State of Uttarakhand), rendered on 10th May, 2012, has held that by fiction of law, the husband or relative would be presumed to have committed the offence of dowry death rendering them liable for punishment unless the presumption is rebutted. It is not only a presumption of law in relation to a death but also a deemed liability fastened upon the husband/relative by operation of law. A moral duty is cast upon the husband/relative to offer a satisfactory explanation for unnatural death of a bride within seven years of her marriage. While finding that there can be no dispute that the deceased died an unnatural death within seven years of her marriage thus the ingredients of Section 304B are fully satisfied, the appeals filed by the accused/appellants were dismissed. In this decision Hon''ble Supreme Court has referred to its earlier decision in Bansi Lal Vs. State of Haryana, wherein while analyzing the provisions of Section 304B of the Act, it was held as under:

In such a fact situation, the provisions of Section 113B of the Evidence Act, 1872 providing for presumption that the accused is responsible for dowry death, have to be pressed in service.

It may be mentioned herein that the legislature in its wisdom has used the word "shall" thus, making a mandatory application on the part of the court to presume that death had been committed by the person who had subjected her to cruelty or harassment in connection with any demand of dowry. It is unlike the provisions of Section 113A of the Evidence Act where a discretion has been conferred upon the court wherein it had been provided that court may presume abetment of suicide by a married woman. Therefore, in view of the above, onus lies on the accused to rebut the presumption and in case of Section 113B relatable to Section 304B IPC, the onus to prove shifts exclusively and heavily on the accused. The only requirements are that death of a woman has been caused by means other than any natural circumstances; that death has been caused or occurred within 7 years of her marriage; and such woman had been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband in connection with any demand of dowry.

Therefore, in case the essential ingredients of such death have been established by the prosecution, it is the duty of the court to raise a presumption that the accused has caused the dowry death. It may also be pertinent to mention herein that the expression "soon before her death" has not been defined in either of the statutes. Therefore, in each case, the Court has to analyze the facts and circumstances leading to the death of the victim and decide if there is any proximate connection between the demand of down-and act of cruelty or harassment and the death. (Vide T. Aruntperunjothi v. State; Devi Lai v. State of Rajasthan; State of Rajasthan v. Jaggu Ram, SCC p. 56. para 13; Anand Kumar v. State of M.P. and Undavalli Narayana Rao v. State of A.P.).

In the case on hand, having regard to the totality of the prosecution evidence and the circumstances emerging there from, wherein the deceased-bride is died an unnatural death by burn having offered no explanation from the defence about suicidal or accidental death, we have no hesitation to hold that in the instant case the verdict of acquittal made by the trial court is an apt illustration of the lack of sensitivity on the part of the trial court. Learned trial court has recorded the verdict of acquittal on mere surmises and conjectures and disregarded the evidence of the witnesses for wholly insufficient and insignificant reasons. It ignored the vital factors of the case without even properly discussing the same. In the result, the appeal filed by the State is allowed. The impugned judgment and order passed by the trial Court is set aside. We convict both the accused/respondents No. 1 and 2 (Murlidhar Agarwal and Smt. Kaushalya Devi) for commission of the offence u/s 304B of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, they are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each. In default of payment of fine amount both the accused shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period six months. The warrant of arrest be issued forthwith against both the accused persons for undergoing the sentence of imprisonment.