K.J.THAKER, J. - (1.) THE State has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment and order dated 29.5.2004 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bhavnagar, in Sessions Case No.59 of 2002. The said case was registered against the present respondent original accused for the offence under Sections 498 -A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that complainant Munniben Rajubhai Bharwad has filed FIR in which she has stated that on 11.11.2001 at 9.30 a.m. when she was present in her house, her husband was not present in the house and she has poured kerosene on her body and set herself ablaze. Thereafter, she was transferred to the Palitana Government Hospital and then to Bhavnagar Government Hospital where she has been treated. At that time, she was conscious. The complainant Munniben has also stated in the FIR that as a result of ill treatment given by her father -in -law's sister Rekhaben and because of altercations with her, she has poured kerosene on her body and set herself ablaze. Said complaint was initially registered as a janvajog entry no.133 of 2001 with Palitana Town Police Station and thereafter it was registered as C.R.No.I -199 of 2001. Thereafter, during the treatment the complainant expired and, therefore, Section 306 of IPC has been inserted in the report. 2.1 Thereafter, investigation was carried out and charge sheet came to be filed against the accused in the Court of learned Magistrate. As the case was sessions triable the same was committed to the Court of Sessions. Thereafter, charge came to be framed and explained to the accused, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 2.2 In order to bring home the charges against the accused, prosecution has examined in several witnesses. The prosecution has also produced documentary evidence on record. 2.3 Thereafter, after filing closing purshis by the prosecution, further statement accused person under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded. The accused denied the case of the prosecution and submitted that a false case is filed against her. 2.4 At the conclusion of trial and after appreciating the oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Judge vide impugned Judgment, acquitted the respondent accused.
(3.) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal dated 29.5.2004 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bhavnagar, in Sessions Case No.59 of 2002, the appellant -State has preferred the present appeal before this Court. Ms.Shah, learned APP appearing for the State has submitted that the order of acquittal is against law and evidence on record. She submitted that the learned Judge has erred in not appreciating the deposition of the witnesses. She also submitted that witness Dudhiben, Exh.9, has stated that her daughter has informed her that her father -in -law's sister, i.e. the accused, was giving mental torture to her. She also stated that her daughter informed her that because of torture given by the accused her daughter has committed suicide. She further submitted that Vijaybhai Sukhabhai has also supported the prosecution case. She has further submitted that the learned Judge has not even considered the dying declaration of the deceased. She lastly submitted that the learned Judge has erred in not properly construing and interpreting the evidence adduced by the prosecution and has erred in acquitting the accused. She, therefore, submitted that this appeal may be allowed and the impugned judgment may be reversed.;