- 1 - appln 2574 of 2010 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2574 OF 2010. The State of Maharashtra ..Applicant. -Versus- Shevanti Gopal Mosankar ..Respondent .......... Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, APP for the State .......... CORAM : R. C. CHAVAN, J. DATE : 27th JUNE 2011. P.C. 1. This is an application for leave to file an appeal appeal against judgment of acquittal of respondent-mother in law of the victim, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The victim was married to one Dattaram in the year 2001 and had two daughters and a son. She was residing with her mother in law in Ratnagiri District and her husband was staying in Mumbai where he had a job. The allegations about illtreatment for failure to meet demand of money surfaced only after the incident, that too in a - 2 - appln 2574 of 2010 very peculiar circumstances. It was stated that the victim's husband had purchased a car by taking a loan from bank and the victim's husband could not repay the loan. Therefore, the car was taken away by the bank. The P.W.1 Sushila does not state about advancing any money to the husband of victim. P.W. 2-Shakuntala states that some amount was advanced by her sister P.W.1 Sushila at the time of purchase of car and that amount was not refunded by the victim's husband and the accused-mother in law used to say if the car was taken away by the authority of the bank from where they should pay the loan borrowed from Sushila. Thus, the probability of victim being frustrated because her husband could not fulfill demands by her sisters for refund of money advanced is greater than the victim's being harassed on demand of money by her mother in law. 2. Prior to the incident, once the victim had run away to somebody else’s house and on another occasion she had tried to jump in the well. On both the occasions, accused had brought her to the matrimonial home. The view taken by the learned Judge cannot be said to be perverse or improbable. Leave refused. Appeal dismissed. ( R. C. CHAVAN, J.)