JUDGMENT :

RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J. 

No one has appeared on behalf of the appellant.

2. Heard Mr. Ajay Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The trial court records have been received.

3. The present appeal has been preferred for setting aside the judgment of acquittal dated 25.01.2020 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Munger (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned trial court’) in Sessions Trial No. 56 of 2019 arising out of Nayaram Nagar P.S. Case No. 135 of 2018. By the impugned judgment under appeal, the accused-respondent no. 2 who was facing trial for the charges under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) has been acquitted.

Prosecution Case

4. On 03.06.2018 at about 01:15 PM, one Manjila Devi (PW-4) alleged in her fardbeyan recorded in the premises of Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College and Hospital, Bhagalpur that her daughter Juli Kumari was married to Manish Kumar (respondent no. 2) in the year 2014 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. After two months of her marriage, the family members of her sasural used to demand a Bullet Motorcycle which the informant’s daughter had told her on mobile phone. They were also demanding two bhar gold. The informant further alleged that about two years ago, the accused persons had assaulted the informant’s daughter due to which she had sustained injuries over her head and ear. The informant’s family got her treated and a Panchayat was held. On 01.06.2018, the informant’s daughter told her over telephone that if they will not give gold and motorcycle, the accused persons are planning to kill her. On 03.06.2018, the son-in-law of the informant informed her that her daughter is getting treatment for burn at Mayaganj Hospital, Bhagalpur and asked them to come as early as possible. The informant asked him to let her talk to her daughter then he said that she was not in a position to talk. When the informant reached the hospital, her daughter was being treated and during treatment she died. The informant alleged that the accused persons have burnt her to death due to one motorcycle and two bhar gold.

5. On the basis of the fardbeyan, Nayaram Nagar P.S. Case No. 135 of 2018 dated 21.06.2018 was registered under Section 304B/34 IPC against (1) Manish Kumar, (2) Krishnanand Yadav, (3) wife of Krishnanad Yadav, (4) Shabnam, (5) Anish and (6) Ashish. After investigation, Police submitted chargesheet bearing Chargesheet No. 327 of 2018 dated 30.11.2018 against Manish Kumar keeping investigation pending against other accused persons. Learned trial court vide order dated 13.12.2018 took cognizance under above-mentioned section.

6. Charges were read over and explained to the respondent no. 2 in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, vide order dated 13.08.2019, charges were framed under Section 304B/34 IPC.

7. In course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses and exhibited several documentary evidences. The names of the prosecution witnesses and the exhibits are being shown hereunder in tabular form:-

8. Thereafter, the statement of the respondent no. 2 was recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC. He took a plea of his innocence and stated that his wife died in course of cooking. No oral or documentary evidence has been adduced on behalf of the defence.

Findings of the Learned Trial Court

9. Learned trial court, after analysing the evidences available on the record found that all the witnesses of the prosecution seem to support the occurrence but they have stated in one voice that the relationship between the accused and the deceased was cordial and the accused or his family members have not demanded motorcycle and gold as dowry. Learned trial court found that the Doctor in his cross-examination has stated that the injury may be accidental.

10. Learned trial court after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case observed that the prosecuti