1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.270 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra - APPLICANT VERSUS Umesh @ Umakant s/o Shivaji Musale (Jadhav) and Ors. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mrs.BR Khekale,APP for Applicant/State. None for Respondents though served. ----- CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE,J. DATE : 8th July, 2010. PER COURT : 1) Heard learned APP for applicant/State. None for the Respondents though served. 2) This is an application preferred by the applicant/State seeking leave to file an appeal against the Judgment and Order of acquittal dated 29th September, 2009 rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Latur in Sessions Case No. 120/2008, acquitting the respondents (original accused) for the offences punishable under 2 Sections 498A, 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3) I have perused the impugned judgment dated 29th September, 2009 and also perused the record and proceedings with the assistance of Mrs. Khekale, learned APP for the applicant. 4) It is evident that the respondents (original accused) Nos. 1 to 3 faced trial for the charges levelled against them under Section 498A, 306 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. To substantiate the said charges, the prosecution has examined in as much as seven witnesses. It is alleged that deceased Seema married with accused no.1 Umesh, whereas accused no.2 – Shivaji and accused no.3 – Shobhabai are her parents in law. There are allegations of ill- treatment at the hands of the accused persons to the victim – Seema. It is also alleged that accused no.1 – Umesh took the victim Seema to her parental house and left there and she committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her person and setting her ablaze there on 19th April, 2008. 5) Apparently, two dying declarations of the victim at Exhibits- 30 and 42 were recorded and the first dying declaration (Exhibit-30) was recorded by police constable whereas the second 3 dying declaration (Exhibit-42) was recorded by the Executive Magistrate. On perusal of the contents of the said dying declarations, it appears that there are improvements in the second dying declaration (Exhibit-42) in comparison to 1st dying declaration. . Moreover, apparently, there are no serious allegations against the accused persons in respect of cruelty to the victim – Seema at the hands of the accused persons, leading the victim to commit suicide and accordingly the ingredients of Section 498A and 306 are absent in the said dying declarations. 6) Moreover, it appears that the victim was treated by a psychiatrist and having comprehensive view of the matter, the ingredients as pointed out and contemplated under Section 306of Indian Penal Code are absent. 7) In the circumstances, the reasoning adopted by the learned Trial Judge while acquitting the respondents (original accused) cannot be faulted with. Moreover, the view adopted by the learned Trial Judge while acquitting the accused persons after scrutinizing and appreciating the evidence is a possible view to be adopted and the same cannot be considered and construed as perverse. Hence, no interference therein is called for. 4 8) In the result, this is not a fit case to grant leave to file appeal and hence present application being sans merit, stands dismissed. Leave to file an appeal stands refused. R. and P. be sent back to the concerned Court. (SHRIHARI P.DAVARE) JUDGE bdv/cran270.10