Madhya Pradesh High Court
Swati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 January, 2018
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-6723-2016
sh
(SWATI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
e
3
ad
Jabalpur, Dated : 16-01-2018
Pr
Shri Amit Dubey, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri S.K Rai, Government Advocate for the respondent-
a State.
hy This petition under Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C. is ad directed against the judgement of acquittal passed by M the Sessions Judge Harda in S.T. No.124/2012. Respondents were prosecuted for offences punishable of under Section 498-A, 307/34 of the IPC. The incident took rt place on 8.6.2012.
ou C h ig H As per complainant, marriage took place between her and deceased Gopal on 24.4.2012. According to sh complainant, her husband and his relatives used to ill- treat the complainant on account of demand of dowry e ad and on 8.6.2012, deceased husband poured kerosene and set her ablaze. She was taken to the Civil Hospital Pr Harda and thereafter to the Choithram Hospital Indore a and then to the Charak Hospital Indore. A criminal case hy was registered and after completing the investigation, ad challan was filed against the respondents. During the pendency of the trial, husband committed suicide & M mother-in-law died, therefore, criminal case against both of husband and mother-in-law abated and trial proceeded against the remaining accused. After recording evidence rt including the evidence of complainant, trial court found ou that no offence was made out and therefore, acquitted C the remaining accused persons.
We have heard learned counsel for applicant at h ig length. Perused the record and the evidence adduced by H prosecution during the trial. It is noteworthy to state that in the so called dying declaration Ex.P/31, the allegations are levelled only the deceased husband and not against any other relatives. Ex.P/31 was recorded by Dr. Vishal Bhatnagar, Charak Hospital, Indore. The dying declaration (Ex.D/6) which was recorded on 29.6.2012 is also incomplete. The F.I.R. was recorded on 18.8.2012 on the basis of marg inquiry which is Ex.P/37. The complainant had not lodged any F.I.R. From the evidence, it is also clear that the sister-in-law and her husband were residing at Timarni, District Harda whereas the incident took place at Village Kathdi. Before the Doctor, sh complainant stated that she sustained burn injury on account of accident. The trial Court has recorded the e ad findings on a proper appreciation of evidence which does not call for any interference. It is well settled that if two Pr views are possible, then as appellate Court, this Court a would not substitute the decision of the trial Court, unless hy the findings are perverse and contrary to the evidence.
ad We do not find any infirmity or perversity with the impugned judgement, therefore, no case is made out to M grant leave.
of Application, therefore, stands rejected and closed.
rt
(S.K. SETH) (ANURAG SHRIVASTAVA)
ou
JUDGE JUDGE
C
h
ig
H
irfan
MOHD Digitally signed by MOHD IRFAN
SIDDIQUI
DN: c=IN, o=High Court of Madhya Pradesh, ou=Administration, IRFAN postalCode=482001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=9e52cc092beccf97fb4519f021 SIDDIQUI aa0efe655497f8e69e9c7c35b1dbc4f77f cd7e, cn=MOHD IRFAN SIDDIQUI Date: 2018.01.17 10:43:41 +05'30'