JUDGMENT :

1. Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 28.01.2016 passed by learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi in S.C.No.151/2013, wherein the accused persons were acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 498A, 302, 504 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the State has preferred the present appeal.

2. Appellant-State is represented by Sri V.M.Banakar, learned Additional S.P.P. and the respondents-accused are represented by learned counsel Sri Bahubali N.Kanabaragi.

3. In order to avoid confusion and overlapping, parties are referred in accordance with the ranks held by them before the trial Court.

4. The complainant is in appeal. The substance of the case as could be seen from the certified copy of the judgment is as under:

About eight years earlier to the date of lodging complaint (03.01.2013), the marriage of Geetha, daughter of complainant-Tippavva was performed with accused No.1. During the first year of marriage, things went on well, the couple begot three children Kiran, Keerthi and Sandhya through the wedlock. After completion of one year, the accused No.1-husband, his mother-accused No.2, father-accused No.3 started ill-treating Geetha both physically and mentally. They used to find fault with her and compelling her to get up early to go to household work and also for work in other houses. She also was pressurized to bring money from her parental house. During the month of November, an amount of Rs.5,000/-was demanded, the complainant family borrowed hand loan and paid. Again there was a demand for Rs.5,000/-by accused No.1.

On receiving the message on 02.01.2013 at about 10.00 p.m. complainant (mother of victim) and her relatives went to the Government Hospital, Gokak, wherein Geetha was admitted due to complete burn injuries. Complainant when enquired Geetha, it was informed by Geetha that on the previous day at 8.00 p.m. in the house of the accused, Geetha was unable to bring Rs.5,000/-from her parental house. Accused No.3 abused Geetha in filthy language and accused No.2 poured kerosene and accused No.1 set the match stick. However in the complaint, it is mentioned that the husband threw water, but the fire did not extinguished. She was admitted to Government Hospital, Gokak and later to KIMS Hospital. Learned trial Judge heard on charge and found grounds to frame charge for the offence punishable under Section 498A, 504, 323, 302, 114 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

The charges were framed and read over. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Learned trial Judge was accommodated with oral evidence of PWs1 to 25 and documentary evidence of Exs.P1 to P55 and M.O.No.1 to 4. The accused persons were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they denied the incriminating circumstances against them and they did not choose to lead defence evidence. The learned trial Judge pronounced the judgment acquitting the accused under Section 232 Cr.P.C.

5. Learned Additional S.P.P. Sri V.M.Banakar submitting arguments on behalf of the appellant-State submitted that there is gross ignorance of overwhelming evidence in favour of the prosecution. The learned trial Judge focused only on hostile evidence of the neighbours, complainant and the brother of the victim. The version spoken by the hostile witnesses, mother-PW11 has not been considered. The non-impact of hostility of the witnesses has not been considered though in the facts and circumstances of the case hostility of complainant or the brother-PW9 need not be considered material. He would further submit that the material witnesses in the circumstances of the case would be the Doctor, who admitted the injured into the hospital and tested her position. The Executive Magistrate who recorded the statement of the injured which subsequently transformed into dying declaration as it related to the cause of death