Cri. Appln. No. 3720/2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3720 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra Through Dhoki Police Station, Tq. & Dist. Osmanabad. ....Applicant. Versus Yasmin Farid Shaikh & Ors. ....Respondents. Mr. K.G. Patil, APP for applicant/State. Mr. V.B. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 5. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & T. V. NALAWADE, JJ. DATED : 3rd May, 2011. ORAL ORDER : [ PER T.V. NALAWADE, J.] 1. This application is filed by the State, seeking permission to file appeal against judgment and order dated 29.5.2010 which was pending in the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Osmanabad. Respondents are acquitted by the Trial Court of the offences punishable under sections 147, 452, 307, 504, 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. The record of the case was called. This Court heard both the sides. 2. As per the case of prosecution, the incident took place on 3.7.2008 Cri. Appln. No. 3720/2010 2 after 7 p.m. Complainant Farida had a quarrel with present respondents over a petty incident. After the quarrel, all the accused came towards the house of complainant Farida and they set her on fire after pouring kerosene on her person. The husband and mother in law of Farida rushed to the house and they shifted Farida to Government Hospital. Farida sustained around 22 % burn injuries. Farida gave a report against respondents to the police on 5.7.2008. 3. Before the Trial Court, prosecution has examined Farida, her husband and few other witnesses. There is only evidence of Farida and her husband. In the cross examination, Farida has admitted that prior to the date of incident, she had quarreled with accused Yasmin as Yasmin did not like the visits of her brother in law to the house of Farida. Yasmin had made complaint to the husband of complainant about it. Due to the disclosure of the visits of the said person to the husband, there was a quarrel between husband of complainant and the complainant on the day of the incident and the husband had even given abuses to the complainant. Such admissions are given during cross examination by Farida. The husband has, however, denied in his cross examination a suggestion that there was a quarrel between him and complainant over the visits of such person to the house of complainant. Thus, there is clear probability that there was some other reason for incident. The Trial Court has observed that there is probability that Farida set herself on fire Cri. Appln. No. 3720/2010 3 due to aforesaid reason. The FIR was given late by two days. Even when the incident took place at about 8 p.m. and the house of complainant is situated in thickly populated area, there is no independent witness to support the version of the complainant. Thus, the view taken by the Trial Court is possible view. Nothing can be achieved by admitting the appeal. So the application for leave to appeal stands rejected. [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] [ NARESH H. PATIL, J.] ssc/ca3720.10