f/ll !:'''EI El iiiiii^^!i^i^itiffii^^ii^^ii!~iiiiiiiiiifi^ lfifc$S!ll IBK%%li^ll^Ki^ ll^^ BSIill^li8K^i^^K^ fi3^^^^1iil^l^^i^^ K8%)iSi^S811illllftiittil^^^Kfc::iM®M RttI.ill^®Si$l:Kli^^l^i;^il%J^?i B2l%!ifi8FIIi»S!^i®l%%:^J' Sl SK8iii%tS1^i/®iiy^if!S^^^^a^^ ssiSVMSmi!il^1^ 'ii^ii^^i^^^iiiisiiiiiiiiii^ .•:.'.;^.^V:;1-.'Y..:'\ '.•^^'^'^^•:^^\;^"4;^ r-'-l:?'l'^^':^:'^.f;^:'';^.'/''.^^^ S^^^ri^te&S^.iiB :-^f~£»;%^N W^'WwS BBli%iSBS •/'''-S-s'^-Q-^^^f^f". ;^>^?^^ -^ \N HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Prittnker Diwaker) CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1139 of 1992 APPELLANT State of Madhya Pradesh VERSUS RESPONDENTS Manmohan Das and others Shri Ashjsh Gupta, P.L. for the appellant Shri Vivek Chopra, counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 378 f1) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: JUDGMENT (05.01.2011) This appeal has been filed by the State against the impugned judgment and order dated 25.04.1992 passed by Second Additjonat Sessions Judge, Bastar in Sessions Trial No. 154/1986 acquittjng the respondents of theoffences under Sections 498A, 306 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the marriage of the deceased Renuka Bai was solemnized with Manmohan Das (responctent No.1) on 12.03.1985 however she died on 21.08.1985 in her matrimoniai house after sustaining 90% burn injuries in her body. Based on the written report Ex.P-6, FIR Ex. P-7 was registered on 24.08.1985 itself against four accused persons. After investigation chalfan was fited on 13.10.1985 forthe offence under sections 4Q8A, 306 and 120B of IPC. 3. So as to hold the accused/respondents guilty, prosecution has examined 9 wjtnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused/respondents were also recorded under section 313 of the Code of Crimjnal Procedure In whteh they denied the charges levelled against them and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case. Apart from this one witness namely Dr. M. A. H. Rijwi (D.W.1) has also been examined by the defence in support of its case. 4. After appreciating the evidence, the Court below vide its impugned judgment and order dated 25.04.1992 has acquitted the n -2-- accused persons of the charges as mentioned above. Hence the present appeal. 5. Counsel for the State submits that the accused/respondents have been acquitted mainly on the basis ofdying dectaration (Ex.P-17) whereas other evidences available on the record have been completely ignored by the Court below. He submits that the two letters (Ex. P-1 & P-2) written by the deceased makes it very ctear that she was subjected to cruelty by the respondents/accused. He submits that the court below has further jgnored the evidence of Gangu Das (PW-1) and Shanti Bai (PW-2), the father and mother ofthe deceised. 6. Supporting the impugned judgment it has been argued by the counsel for the respondents that from dying declaration (Ex.P-17) it is clear that the deceased died on account of burn injuries sustained by her in an unfortunate accident. He submits that so far as the letter written by the deceased Ex. P-1 is concemed, there is no specific allegation against any of the accused and only general allegations have been made against them. In respect of another letter Ex. P-2 written by the deceased, it has been argued by Shri Chopra that this appears to be a concocted and created document because one part of this tetter has been written in blue ink whereas other part in black ink and the hand-writing appears to be different. He further submits that so far as the statements of PWs. 1 & 2 (father and mother of the deceased) are concemed, these have been made simply becai^e they have lost thejr daughter and want to fateely implteate the respondents. 7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. So far as Ex. P-1 & P-2 - the two letters written by the deceased are concerned, in Ex. P-1 , there is no specific allegation against any of the accused persons and the same appears to be though serious but general. Ex. P.2 - the second letter of the deceased creates doubt because the initialpart of this letter has been written in blue ink and there is no allegation against anyone whereas the other part of the same has been written in black ink and appears to be in different ^ '"^'^ -^^^" ^t. hand-writing. Apart from this. in dying declaration Ex. P-17, there is no allegation against any of the respondents. So far as the Court statement of PWs. 1 & 2 (father and mother) is concemed, though the allegations have been made but the possibjlity of false tmpltoation cannot be ruled out in partteular considering the dying declar^ion of the deceased. In these circumstances, the fjndings ofthe Court below do not appear to be faulted with. 9. Thus after going through the material available on record and being very much conscious of the existing legal position that jn an appeal agajnst acquittal if two views are possible on the basis of evidence led by the prosecution and the trial Court taking one view favoured the accused, this Court is of the considered opinion that reversion of the findings of acquittal by the appeKate Court taking the other possible view into consideration, is not permissibte in law and therefore the judgment impugned acquitting responctents/accused of the offence under Sectjons 498A, 306 and 120B ofthe Indian Penal Code, is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. Accordjngly, the appeal being without substance is liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- Pritmker Diwakar Judge