- (1.)The present appeal, under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 23.2.2001 passed by the learned City Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 294/2000, whereby, the learned trial Judge acquitted the original accused the respondents herein, of the charges for the offence punishable under Section 498-A, 306 read with section 114 of IPC and under section 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
(2.)The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the marriage between deceased Vimla daughter of complainant Govindbhai Anaji Lakhwara and accused no. 1 took place in the year 1992. That, after marriage, deceased was not sent to her inlaw's house immediately, but was sent in the year 1997 after "Aana" ceremony. A few days after the said ceremony accused no. 1 went to the house of complainant along with the deceased and demanded Rs. 5000/- for his business. At that time, the deceased told the complainant that accused no. 1 and 5 were taunting her that deceased did not bring as much dowry as the wife of elder brother of accused no. 1 brought. She also told that accused no. 1 used to beat her. The complainant consoled her saying that he would pay Rs. 5000/- as soon as he could arrange for the funds. That about two months after the said incident, when the complainant went to the house of the accused to bring Vimla to his house, Vimla told him that accused no. 1 used to beat her because the complainant did not pay Rs. 5000/- and Vimla was not sent at that time. Four days thereafter, Vimla was left at the house of the complainant because dowry was found to be insufficient. On May 11, 1998, deceased Vimla filed Misc. Application for maintenance. The compromise was arrived at in the said matter on 26.11.1998 and accused no. 2 and 4 took Vimla to their house. On account of harassment, Vimla returned to her parents house and filed Misc. Application No. 33/1999 on February 6, 1999. She also filed Criminal case No. 237/1999. A compromise was arrived at and accused no. 1 took the deceased with him. Ten days thereafter, when the deceased and accused no. 1 came to the complainant, Vimla again complained that accused are harassing her. The complainant consoled the deceased and sent back to her in-law's house. On 30.3.2000, a policeman informed the complainant that the deceased had sustained burn injuries. The deceased subsequently, died. Therefore, the complaint was lodged. Necessary investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, respondents were arrested and, ultimately, charge-sheet was filed against them, which was numbered as Sessions Case No. 294/2000. The trial was initiated against the respondents.
(3.)To prove the case against the present accused, the prosecution has examined witnesses and also produced documentary evidence.