However, Sunita has been acquitted.
This is how the present appeal has been heard finally by this Court.
P/9 is a strong iron clad testimony from the clutches of which the accused cannot escape.
The letter Ex.
Sunita.
The dying declaration of the deceased has been recorded in presence of the Magistrate Shri S.P.S. Chauhan PW 2 and numberfault can be found in the same.
The Trial Court also discarded the theory of the defence that Sunita was tutored by her Mausa in giving the statement.
The High Court also recorded that the dying declaration as well as allegations in letter Ex.
The deceased Sunita was a graduate.
As per them they were falsely implicated in the matter.
P/9 is recorded and proved in accordance with law.
After the companypletion of the investigation they were all companymitted to their trial.
Marriage between Appellant No.
Various prosecution witnesses were examined.
In this letter Shri Ashok, brother of the deceased also wrote that deceased was kept with affection.
1 under Sections 304 B and 498 A of Indian Penal Code IPC .
After her death, it was treated as dying declaration and case was registered against the accused persons.
Further at the instance of the deceased, Appellant No.
After closing of the shop, Appellant No.
Sunita companymitted suicide on 14.1.1991 i.e. within three years of the marriage.
The accused persons did number admit to the charge and abjured their guilt.
P.8 were duly supported by the testimony of the father P.W.1 , the brother W.7 and the uncle P.W.4 of the deceased.
This led to the prosecution of the two appellants as well as father and sister of Appellant No.
P/8 available on record also amply proved that the deceased was being treated with cruelty.
The shop must have been closed.
On the basis of the oral and documentary evidence brought on record, the Sessions Court returned the verdict of guilty qua the appellants herein, as well as sister of Appellant number1.
Special Leave Petition was filed questioning the validity of the said verdict of the High Court in which leave was granted.
She did number like the business of Namkeen being run by Appellant No.
Sunita was solemnised in April, 1988.
P8, which was a letter written by the deceased stating she was being treated with cruelty.
1 started living separately from his parents.
The appellants filed the appeal before the High Court against the said companyviction and sentence.
2 was the mother in law, respectively, of the deceased Smt.
1 and the deceased, who was a graduate, took job as teachers in private school as is evident from the statement of Rameshwar Dayal Sharma P.W.1, the father of the deceased, himself.
The trial proceeded.
By the impugned judgment dated 21.10.2008 the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has affirmed the companyviction and sentence, thereby dismissing the appeal qua these two Appellants.
1 and Smt.
K. SIKRI, J. The two appellants before us are the son and the mother.
Appellant No.
1 was the husband and Appellant No.
We may mention that as per the prosecution, just before her death, she even gave a statement which was recorded as Ex.
