1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4171 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL ST.NO.824 OF 2007 The State of Maharashtra, through Karjat Police Station, Ahmednagar Applicant Versus 1 Aasif Yusuf Shaikh 2 Yusuf Suleman Shaikh 3 Aarif Yusuf Shaikh 4 Aatik Yusuf Shaikh 5 Najmin Firoz Shaikh Respondents Mr.Dilip Bankar Patil, A.P.P. for the applicant. Mr.Ashok Ghuge, advocate holding for Mr.S.V.Sudrik, advocate for Respondents. CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 03rd July, 2009. P.C.: 1 This is an application seeking leave to file appeal against the order of acquittal recorded by Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar on 30.07.2007 in Sessions Case No.135/2006. 2 Respondents-accused were prosecuted for commission of offence punishable under Sections 498A & 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 Deceased Jabina is the daughter of complainant Raziya. Marriage of Jabina was performed with accused no.1 Asif in the month of 2 December 2004, some two years prior to the alleged incident. It is contended that there was demand of an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and on account of non fulfillment of demand, deceased was being harassed. As a result of illtreatment, she finally decided to end her life and committed suicide by hanging herself on 27.04.2006. 4 In order to substantiate the charge, prosecution examined P.W. 1 Raziya Pathan, mother of deceased and P.W.2 Munsi Pathan, father of deceased. Both the witnesses have not given particulars in respect of illtreatment meted out to deceased. There is no evidence placed on record that some three months prior to the alleged incident, there was any communication with deceased or that she had reported in respect of harassment suffered by her at the hands of accused. Deceased gave birth to a male child on 27.03.2006. Birth of the child was celebrated in much funfair at the house of accused. At the time of celebration or even prior to that, there was no disclosure made by deceased Jabina to her parents about the alleged illtreatment. It is stated that illtreatment was on account of alleged demand of Rs.One lac for securing service to accused no.1 Asif. It transpires that Asif was already employed as a teacher in the High School. Accused no.2 – Yusuf, father in law of deceased, is a retired teacher and is getting pension of Rs.2000/-. Accused no.3 – Aarif is running a paint and printing shop at Mirajgaon, whereas accused no.4 Atik is serving in financial institution and is having business of printing marriage invitation cards. As against this, financial condition of parents of deceased is quite precarious. Admittedly, they reside in two rooms constructed in mud. 5 Considering all these relevant aspects, it is difficult to believe the case put forth by the prosecution in respect of harassment on account of 3 demand of Rs.One lac by the accused. The reasons recorded by trial Judge while directing acquittal of the accused appear to be reasonable and based on proper appreciation of evidence placed on record. Merely because some other view is also possible in the facts and circumstances of this case, is not a ground for causing interference in the order of acquittal. In this view of the matter, appeal does not require any consideration. 6 Hence, application seeking leave to file appeal stands rejected. Consequently, appeal also stands rejected. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* adb/criappln417107