K.S. Jhaveri, J. - (1.)THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 19.10.2005 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Patan in Sessions Case No. 377 of 2002, whereby the respondent -original accused was acquitted of the charges under Sections 498(A) and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.)THE facts in brief giving rise to the filing of present appeal are as under:
2.1 The complainant was serving in security at GGS -1, ONGC, Lanva. He has six brothers and three sisters. The elder sister of the complainant was married at village -Sipor. That Manguben, the deceased, was married to the accused twelve years prior to the incident. Father of the complainant had died sixteen years ago. That his mother Shantaben is staying with the youngest brother of the complainant, i.e. Babubhai. That Manguben had two sons and two daughters. That father -in -law of Manguben had died three years ago and mother -in -law of the deceased stayed separately. That Manguben was residing with the accused and their children. The deceased Manguben used to visit her parental house as and when the occasions come. That the accused did not do anything and he was in a bad habit of gambling and drinking wine. Therefore, the deceased used to tell the accused to stop such habits, but the accused did not listen. The accused used to beat the deceased Manguben and thereby giving her mental and physical harassment. Therefore, the deceased used to come at her parental house with agony. However, on thinking about the future of the children, the complainant sent the deceased back at her matrimonial home. The complainant and his family members also persuaded the accused to stop bad habits, however, the accused did not change. On 12.9.1999 or 13.9.1999 at about 4 p.m., the deceased after annoying with her husband, the accused, came to her parental home and told that the accused used to beat her often. Manguben stayed there for about four days. On 16.9.1999, the accused came and took the deceased with an assurance that he will keep her well. On 19.9.1999, the complainant received information that the deceased got severe burn injuries and she was taken to Government Dispensary, Patan. Therefore, the complainant went there. The police recorded the statement of the deceased and her statement was also recorded before the Executive Magistrate. Thereafter, she was shifted to Government Dispensary, Mehsana, where she succumbed to the injuries during treatment. On these allegations, the complaint was given to the police against the accused.

2.2 Thereafter, investigation was carried out and the accused came to be arrested. At the end of investigation, charge -sheet was filed against the accused before the Magistrate Court. Since the offence was exclusively triable by the Court of sessions, the case was committed to Sessions Court and, ultimately, trial was initiated and charge came to be framed. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

2.3 In order to bring home the charges against the accused persons, prosecution has examined following witnesses.

2.4 The prosecution has also produced following documents in support of its case: -

2.5 Thereafter, after filing of closing purshis by the prosecution, further statement of the accused persons 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 him.

At the conclusion of trial and after appreciating the oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Judge vide impugned Judgment, acquitted the respondent. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal dated 19.10.2005 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Patan in Sessions Case No. 377 of 2002, the appellant -State has preferred the present appeal before this Court.

(3.)MS . C.M. Shah, learned APP appearing for the State has taken us through the evidence and contended that the trial Court has committed an error in acquitting the accused inspite of voluminous evidence against him and contended that the trial Court ought not to have acquitted the accused. He submitted that the prosecution has successfully proved its case through the evidence on record. He submitted that the trial Court ought to have believed the dying declaration of the deceased of the deceased. He also submitted that the prosecution witness gets corroboration from medical evidence and, therefore, it may not have been discarded by the trial Court. He also submitted that even the prosecution witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and there was no reason to dis -believe their version. He, therefore, prays that this appeal may be allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment.