6. P.W.1, as we have already narrated, has not stated anything against these accused particularly accusing them. She has generally stated that the family members of the bridegroom demanded 25 soverign and Rs.30,000/- for the marriage. Further in the chief examination itself she has stated that out of good intention wishing the young couple to settle down in life, she gave Rs.20,000/-. Thus, it was not out of any demand, but out of her own volition. A close reading of the evidence of P.W.1 would go to show that there was no demand at all for any dowry and presentation made at the time of marriage were made voluntarily. They were only customary presentation. After the marriage, it is on record that there was no love lost between the first accused and the deceased. She used to go and overstay at the house of P.W.1 for a long time. She did not have a child. Further, her jewels were pledged by A4 in a bank. Though P.W.1 as well as P.W.2 have stated that the deceased told that these accused were demanding Rs.10,000/- and 10 soverigns gold jewels, no details such as the occasion, time and the place where such statements were made by the deceased have not been stated by these two witnesses. In a very vague manner they have stated that the deceased told them that the accused in general demanded Rs.10,000/- and 10 soverign of gold jewels. These vague statements, in our considered view would not pass the test of close scrutiny. In the absence of any corroboration from any other independent source, in our considered view, going on the above vague statements, we cannot believe the evidence against the accused. Above all P.W.8, yet another close relative of the deceased has stated that on the day of occurrence, around 03.30 – 04.00 p.m., he found there was a quarrel between A4 and the deceased. The deceased demanded to redeem the jewels which he had pledged in the bank and in that quarrel, according to him, the 4th accused told that she had not brought the jewels from her parental home as agreed upon.
