1 APPLN-884.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE  CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.884 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra .... Applicant Vs. Sou. Kalawati Buchhirajmallu @ Rajendra Bhairi & Ors. .... Respondents Smt. V.R. Bhosale, APP, for the Applicant-State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: NOVEMBER 17, 2011 P.C: 1. This is an application for leave to file appeal against Judgment of acquittal of the respondents rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 r/w Section 34 of the IPC. 2. Victim Vandana was married to accused No.8 Yadgiri in 1995. There are two daughters of this marriage. She committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her person in the morning of 8-9-2008. She was admitted to hospital by the accused-Yadgiri himself. She died on 2 APPLN-884.11 21-9-2008. 3. There are two dying declarations recorded which are at Exhibits-32 and 42. In Exhibit-32, which was recorded by a Sub- Judicial Magistrate, the victim stated that since she had lot of trouble because of household work, she poured kerosene on her person and set herself on fire. Her husband came to her rescue, extinguished the fire and carried her to hospital for treatment. This dying declaration was recorded on 8-9-2008 at 12:30 hours. The another dying declaration was recorded by Police Naik Unale at 8:45 p.m., who was examined as PW-7. In that statement the victim stated that in the morning of 8-9-2008 there was a quarrel between her and her brother-in-law Raju @ Rajendra, accused No.9, on account of a chair which her daughters were occupying. She stated that since her brother- in-law was always harassing her, she poured kerosene on her person and set herself on fire. 4. The parents of the victim and her brother, who were examined as PWs-1, 2 and 3, stated that the victim had told her that the accused persons poured kerosene on her person and set her on fire. Thus they tried to 3 APPLN-884.11 aggravate the offence to one of murder, discrediting themselves. The report of the incident itself was given on 16-11-2008 and the reason given was that in spite of efforts, the police were not ready to record the report. This has to be read in the context of the fact that the first informant's son PW-3 Venkatraj is a Police Constable, working in the same Solapur District. Therefore, it is hard to believe that his father's complaint would not be recorded by police officers or that he did not know as to what should be done when police officer in-charge of the police station refuses to take report. The learned Judge, therefore, cannot be faulted for holding that, though suicide was proved, there is no abetment to commit suicide and no ill-treatment attributable to the respondents. The view taken is neither perverse nor improbable. Hence leave refused. Appeal dismissed. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)