1 revnst58.09.sxw ast IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO.58 OF 2009 Shakila Hanif Quareshi ..Applicant. Vs. Hasinabegum Chhotulal Shaikh & Ors. ..Respondents. -------- Mr.Jotiram Jadhav i/b. Mr.Vilas Tapkir for applicant. Mr.P.S.Hingorani, APP for State. -------- CORAM : B.R.GAVAI, J. DATE : MARCH 22, 2010. P.C. 1. Present Application has been filed by the Applicant challenging the order of the acquittal recorded by the learned Additional Session Judge, Pune dated 25 th July, 2008, thereby acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under section 302 & 498-A r/w section 34 of the I.P.Code. 2. It is the prosecution case that deceased Afsha was married to Dastagir. It is alleged that relation between the deceased and accused who are her in-laws were not cordial. There used to be disputes between them. It is the allegation of the prosecution that on 3 rd May, 2006, the deceased got infuriated because of the fight with accused No.1 2 revnst58.09.sxw and therefore, in act of anger, just to threaten Accused No.1 she herself poured kerosene on her person and alarmed accused No.1 that she is going to die. It is allegation of the prosecution that the accused No.1 thereafter went up-stair,snatched the kerosene can from the hands of deceased Afsha and poured remaining kerosene also on person of deceased and set her on fire. 3. The prosecution has recorded two dying declaration of the deceased. First one is dated 3 rd May, 2006, in which the deceased does not implicate any one. In the second dying declaration dated 4 th May, 2006, she implicates the accused persons. 4. The learned Session Judge has acquitted the accused by coming to conclusion that second dying declaration was by way of after thought and as a result of tutoring to deceased by her relatives or may be her own attempt and intention to falsely implicate the accused in the commission of the alleged crime. The learned Judge has also relied on the admission of the PW 2 Faiyaz in his evidence that he was told by the deceased that when the incidence had taken place, the accused No.2 was not present in the house. On this factual background, the learned Trial Court found that second dying declaration cannot be said to be beyond doubt of suspicion. It has found that testimony of PW 1 supports the version given in the first dying declaration. Insofar as the allegation 3 revnst58.09.sxw under section 498-A is concerned, the learned Trial Judge has found that though the statement of the relatives of the deceased were recorded immediately after the incident, they have not alleged ill-treatment of the deceased by the accused and therefore, found that conviction for charge under section 498-A also cannot be sustainable. 5. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that the view taken by the learned Trial Court is either perverse or warrant interference of this Court. Hence dismissed. [ B.R.GAVAI, J ]