In cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove all circumstances beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT

ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.

1. In the instant appeal, original informant/appellant has invoked provisions under section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) thereby taking exception to the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalna in Sessions Case No.49 of 2021 which was tried for commission of offence under section 302 of Indian Penal Code (IPC).

FACTS IN BRIEF IN THE TRIAL COURT

2. Present appellant (original informant) set law into motion by approaching Kadim Jalna Police Station, alleging that respondent no.2, a truck driver was married to his daughter Shama and out of their wedlock they had a son. According to him, accused no.1 maintained affair with accused no.2. On such count, there were frequent quarrels between them. Deceased used to regularly inform about treatment meted out to her. On 03.11.2020, accused – husband poured diesel on his daughter and incinerated her. His daughter suffered 100% burns and died on the spot and hence the FIR. On the strength of which, crime No.516 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under sections 302, 201 and 120-B read with Section 34 of IPC.

3. Both accused were charge-sheeted and tried by the learned Sessions Judge vide Sessions Case No. 49 of 2021 in which prosecution had examined in all 8 witnesses and also relied on documentary evidence. That, learned Sessions Judge conducted trial and on appreciating the oral and documentary evidence adduced by prosecution, reached to a fnding that prosecution failed to prove that there was criminal conspiracy hatched by the accused persons for committing murder of deceased and thereby acquitted accused persons from all charges.

It is the above judgment and order of acquittal that is now questioned by way of instant appeal.

RIVAL SUBMISSIONS

4. Heard learned counsel for appellant – informant at length. Appraising us about the status and relations between deceased, accused no.1, accused no.2 and appellant herein, it is submitted that in spite of being married and in spite of having son, accused no.1 maintained extra marital relationship with accused no.2. Informant had learnt about it from none other than deceased daughter. That, only because deceased had objected to such relations, accused no.1 and accused no.2 conspired amongst themselves to do away with deceased. Accordingly, in such clear motive accused no.1 set deceased ablaze. That, there was no other reason nor it is suicidal or accidental death. According to learned counsel, circumstances at the scene of occurrence clearly suggest that it is murder and nothing less than that.

5. Learned counsel would further point out that apart from testimony of informant, there was other corroborative evidence in the form of testimonies of PW-3 Sopan, PW-5 Shami and PW-4 Rehan, very child of accused no.1 and deceased, who was present in the house at the time of incident and he too had deposed to that extent. Their evidence has remained unshaken on the material aspect of presence of accused and deceases suffering extensive burns, thereby clearly suggesting that it was misdeed of none other than accused. Learned counsel would add that in spite of such evidence, learned trial court has failed to appreciate the same in its correct perspective.

6. He would vehemently submit that investigating machinery had gathered material and had dispatched the same to the analyzer. C.A. reports were yet to be received. It was a crucial piece of evidence. That, however, learned trial Judge for the best reasons known to it did not wait for C.A. reports and hurriedly proceeded with the trial and passed judgment in absence of C.A. reports. That, it gave major set back to the prosecution case. Resultantly, on above aspects he prays to allow instant appeal by granting the prayers raised herein.

7. We have given anxious thought to entire submissions advanced before us. We have thereafter carefully examined the entire material placed before the learned trial court. It seems that, case