Criminal Appln.No.4561/2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4561 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Dattaram Hiraman Mengal and ors. .. Respondents Mr D.R.Kale, A.P.P. for applicant CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE : 9th December 2010 PER COURT 1. This is an application filed by the applicant/State challenging the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangamner, dated 17.7.2010, in Sessions Case No.12/2005, acquitting the respondents of the offences punishable under Section 323, 307 read with sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution has alleged that the applicants had assaulted P.W.1 Alka and she was administered some insecticide by accused No.3. According to P.W.1 Alka she became unconscious and regained her conscious in the hospital. The opinion of Dr. Phadtare is that some insecticide had been administered to P.W.1 Alka. Criminal Appln.No.4561/2010 2 3. The trial Court principally acquitted the respondents/accused on the ground that P.W.1 Alka had admitted in her cross-examination that her marriage to accused No.1 had been performed against her wish and for the last more than two years she was residing with one Kisan. The trial Court also found that as per the medical papers history which was narrated was of consumption of insecticide by Alka on 23.1.2005 at about 9.30 a.m. The trial Court further came to the conclusion that if P.W.1 Alka was to be believed that she had been physically assaulted by accused for half an hour, it was strange that there was no external injury on her person. The trial Court also observed that the mother of P.W.1 Alka had lodged a complaint against father of P.W.Alka on the basis of which an offence had been registered against him. In that background, therefore, the trial Court came to the conclusion that Alka had admitted to commit suicide could not be ruled out. Further, it appears that the stomach wash of Alka was not referred to the Chemical Analyzer and thus, there is absolutely no corroborative evidence that Alka had been administered any insecticide. 4. We have heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and we have perused the findings recorded by the trial Court. Upon such perusal we do not notice any infirmity/perversity in the reasoning of the trial Court to warrant any interference in this appeal against acquittal. The view taken by the trial Court appears to be a possible view to be taken on the basis of record. Criminal Appln.No.4561/2010 3 5. In that light of the matter, therefore, there being no merit in the application, Criminal Application No.4561 of 2010 is dismissed. Leave refused. ( A.V. POTDAR, J. ) ( P.V. HARDAS, J.) (vvr/4561.10criappln)