1` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal APPA No. 119/2009 in Cri. Appeal No.-------/2009 State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Gadchiroli vs. Lumaji Gejuji Ramteke and others. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. CORAM : A.P.Lavande & R.C.Chavan, JJ DATE : 26.03.2010 Heard Mr. P.D. Kothari, learned APP for the applicant. By this application the applicant seeks leave to appeal against the Judgment and order of acquittal dated 2nd May, 2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli in Sessions Case No. 42/2004 acquitting the respondents of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The respondents who are in-laws and husband of deceased Yogita were tried for the above referred offences. The respondent no. 2 married Yogita on 5.6.2003. Yogita expired in the hospital on 15.8.2003 at about 4.00 p.m. on account of 94% burn injuries suffered by her. According to the prosecution, deceased Yogita was set ablaze by husband in 2` presence of his parents. The prosecution relied upon oral dying declarations alleged to have been made by deceased Yogita to her sister and her mother in the hospital before her death. The learned trial Court found that the dying declarations alleged to have been made by deceased Yogita to her sister and mother were not consistent. The learned trial court also found that it was doubtful as to whether deceased would have been in a position to make statement since she had suffered 94% burn injuries and expired within three hours of the incident. Having heard the learned APP and having perused the Judgment and order of acquittal, we are of the considered opinion, that the findings recorded by the learned trial court can not be said to be perverse warranting interference in appeal against acquittal. The reasons given by the learned trial court for disbelieving oral dying declarations made by deceased Yogita to her sister and mother can not be said to be perverse. The view taken by the learned trial court is a probable view and, therefore, no interference is called for in the Judgment of acquittal. For the reasons aforesaid, we find no merit in the application. The application is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE patle 3`