n view of the above observation made, it is amply clear that even though the accused had tortured and harassed the deceased because of which she was constantly running away from her matrimonial home and has also filed a number of complaints against the accused, the same cannot be said to be the reason for her death in the light of the fact and circumstances of the present case and the dying declaration made by her. The learned counsel for the appellants has placed reliance upon the decision of this Court reported in the case of Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2014) Vol. 9 SCC 491 wherein it is held that Sections 49A and 306 IPC are independent and constitute different offences. Merely because an accused has been held liable to be punished under Section 498A IPC, it does not follow that on the same evidence, he must also and necessarily be held guilty of having abetted the commission of suicide by the women concerned under Section 306 IPC. Therefore, the conviction and sentence for offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 114 of the IPC of the present appellants is contrary to the legal evidence on record particularly the dying declaration of the deceased and the conduct of the accused who took the deceased to the hospital. This fact has been grossly ignored by the courts below while convicting and sentencing the appellants for the aforesaid offences. Therefore, the conviction and sentence for the aforesaid offence is erroneous and accordingly it is liable to be set aside. After evaluation of evidence on record and concurrent finding of fact recorded by the trial court and the appellate court, the appellants were convicted for the offences punishable under Section 498A and 306 read with Section 114 of the IPC. The accused were acquitted for the offences punishable under Section 304B read with Section 114 of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 as they did not find any evidence on record to bring home the guilt of appellants for the offences punishable under Section 306 as there is no cogent evidence in this regard in the finding of fact. Therefore, the conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Section 498A of I.P.C. with regard to cruelty is held to be proved by the courts below. The same is accepted by us and they are required to be convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC. The conviction and sentence passed by the High Court for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 114 of IPC is liable to the be set aside and accordingly we set aside the same. Since we have upheld the conviction for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC., it is to be carefully examined by us taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case as to what sentence is required to be imposed upon the appellants. Submit