1 Criminal Appl. No.2208 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2208 OF 2010 State of Maharashtra APPLICANT VERSUS Gangadhar Chandoba Kamble and others RESPONDENTS Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for applicant/State Mr.U.B.Bilolikar, learned counsel for respondent no.1 to 4. (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 13/12/2010 PER COURT : 1. Since we have condoned the delay in filing the present application, application is heard at the request of learned counsels for the parties, though it is not listed as such. 2. By this application, the applicant/State seeks leave to file appeal against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Biloli, dated 17/02/2010, in Sessions Case No.9/2007, acquitting the respondents for offence punishable u/s. 498­A, 306, 304­B r/w. 34 2 Criminal Appl. No.2208 of 2010 of IPC. The prosecution had alleged that deceased Kalpana, wife of accused no.1 Gangadhar was married about 8­9 years prior to the incident. The prosecution further alleged that Kalpana was illtreated by the accused as the accused were demanding an amount of Rs.50,000/­ and on account of failure of the parents of Kalpana to pay the aforesaid amount, deceased was illtreated, which ultimately resulted in the deceased committed suicide by consuming poison. 3. The prosecution had examined 3 witnesses namely P.W.No.1 Pundlik, father of deceased Kalpana, P.W.No.2 Sulochana, aunt of deceased Kalpana. With the assistance of learned counsels for the parties, we have perused their evidence. Allegations in respect of the demand for Rs.50,000/­ was initially for the purchase of an auto­ rickshaw and the renewal of the said demand after the auto­rickshaw was handed over to the accused, appeared to be extremely vague and omni­bus. None of the witnesses have stated the particulars about the time when aforesaid demands were made. From their evidence also, it does not appear that soon before the death of deceased Kalpana, she was subjected to any illtreatment on account of the demand for any amount. Undisputedly, Kalpana had died on account of consumption of poison. However, evidence falls miserably short for proving the offence against the respondents beyond reasonable doubt. The Trial Court, on appreciating the evidence, has accordingly given the benefit of doubt to the present applicants. We have perused the record and proceeding and we do not find any 3 Criminal Appl. No.2208 of 2010 ground to intervene with the findings recorded by the Trial Court. We do not notice any perversity in the reasoning of the Trial Court to justify the admission for grant of leave. 4. Accordingly, criminal application fails and is dismissed. Leave refused. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/DEC. 2010/cri.appl.2208­10