HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRL.A.No.1069 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The lower Court acquitted A-1 to A-4 of the offences under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC by the impugned judgment. Relationship between the parties is not in dispute. The victim after sustaining burning injuries gave statement to the police to the effect that she sustained the burns in accidental fire when she was lighting wooden stove by pouring kerosene in it with a mug. The said statement of the victim-Ex.P.5 was registered by the police as FIR in this case. On that basis, originally the case was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. It is stated that the victim also gave similar statement to the Magistrate as dying declaration. But the said dying declaration was not marked by examining the Magistrate. Therefore, the lower Court should not have placed reliance on such dying declaration. During life time of the victim she did not go back on Ex.P.5 - statement given to the police. Subsequent to the death of the victim, parents and relations alleged dowry harassment against the accused. Neither in Ex.P.5 - statement nor anywhere else, the victim alleged any dowry harassment against any of the accused. The allegations of dowry harassment made by parents and relations of the deceased subsequent to her death, have no foundation. They are all after-thoughts put forward for their own reasons. In the circumstances, the lower Court rightly recorded acquittal of the accused. I do not find any legal or factual grounds to come to a different conclusion in the appeal. Hence, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed. ________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU,J 27th July, 2011. PNV