Point of Law : Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, wherein the word "Proved" is defined --A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it, the Court either believes it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists.

JUDGMENT :

This appeal is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 01.10.2013 rendered by the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Gulbaga ( for short, 'the trial Court') for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 302 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. The appellant/State seeking intervention of this Court on various grounds urged in the appeal memo and thereby seeks to set aside of the impugned judgment of acquittal and prays to allow the appeal thereby convict the respondents/accused of the aforesaid offences.

2. Heard Sri Prakash Yeli, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the appellant/State and so also Sri Baburao Mangane, learned counsel for the respondents/accused and perused the entire material on record.

3. The factual matrix of the prosecution case briefly stated are as under;

It transpires from the prosecution case that, on 31.05.2012 at about 9.00 a.m., the Police Sub-Inspector of Aland P.S. received a MLC report from Government Hospital, Aland to the effect that one Smt. Umadevi has been admitted to the said hospital for treatment as she has sustained burn injuries. It is stated that on the said date at about 10.15 a.m., the Police Sub-Inspector of Aland P.S. visited the Government Hospital, Aland and got confirmed that one Smt. Umadevi W/o Santosh Chitali, resident of Aland has been admitted to the hospital for treatment due to burn injuries sustained by her. Thereafter, the Police Sub-Inspector, Aland P.S. submitted a requisition to the doctor who treated the injured and sought his opinion as to whether the injured was in a fit position to give her statement or not. Accordingly, the said doctor gave an endorsement stating that the injured was in a position to give her statement. Later, in the presence of the doctor, Police-Sub Inspector recorded the statements of the injured Smt. Umadevi. Based upon her statement, a case in Crime No.110/2012 came to be registered by recording the first information report for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 307 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. During the course of the treatment, the injured Smt. Umadevi breathed her last. Consequently, the investigating agency had submitted a requisition for incorporation of Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 in the aforesaid crime and accordingly offence under Section 302 of IPC incorporated substituting the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC. Thereafter, the investigating officer took up the case for investigation and proceeded to the scene of offence held inquest over the dead body of the deceased Smt. Umadevi and the dead body was sent to the mortuary where the doctor conducted an autopsy over the dead body; subsequently, the investigating officer secured the post-mortem report; drew the spot mahazar in the presence of witnesses; conducted the inquest over the dead body of the deceased Smt. Umadevi; recorded the statement of inquest witnesses; and after completion of the investigation, the Investigating officer laid the charge sheet against accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

After receipt of the charge-sheet, the committal Court passed an order as contemplated under Section 209 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and complied with Section 207 of Cr.P.C. by supplying the charge sheet and other materials and the case has been committed to Sessions Court which culminated into the registration of S.C.No.388/2012.

4. After committal of the case, the trial Court has heard the arguments of both the learned Public Prosecutor and also the defence counsel relating to framing of charges and since there were grounds to proceed against the accused, the trial Court framed the charges against the accused of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. The charges were read over and explained to the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried. Accordingly, a plea of the