The prosecution must provide strong evidence to establish guilt under penal provisions such as Section 498A and 406 of the IPC.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. The instant petition under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.') has been filed on behalf of petitioner seeking setting aside of impugned order dated 27.10.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 39/2017.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner i.e. Laxmi and respondent no. 1 i.e. Kanhaiya Lal Gupta had got married on 09.05.2005 at Khairthal, Rajasthan according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Although the marriage had been consummated, no child was born from the wedlock. It was the case of petitioner that at the time of the marriage, father of respondent no. 1 had taken Rs.1,40,000/- from the petitioner's mother for arrangement of marriage in Khairthal. However, despite this payment, respondent no. 1 and his relatives had expressed dissatisfaction with the arrangements made. It was further stated that immediately after the marriage, the respondent no. 1had informed the petitioner that he had agreed to the marriage solely for dowry and cash, as he was in dire need of money for his business, and that he had no interest in the petitioner and did not like her. It was alleged that respondent no. 1 had instructed the petitioner not to expect anything from him and had asked the petitioner's mother for daily expenses and needs. In addition to this, respondent no. 1 and his family members had demanded motorcycles, domestic articles such as fridge, television, washing machine, etc. and had threatened the petitioner. Further, the respondents had warned the petitioner that failure to bring money for these items would prevent her from living peacefully in the matrimonial home. Subsequently, the petitioner had returned to her mother's home in June, 2005. However, she had later returned to her matrimonial home, where she had again endured the same cruelties and demands for a motorcycle, and respondent no. 1 along with his brother and other family members had attempted to set the petitioner on fire by using kerosene oil on 27.01.2006. Further, the respondents had been entrusted with the stridhan articles by the petitioner, which had not been returned. Later, the petitioner had got an FIR bearing no. 204/2007 registered at Police Station Dabri, Delhi under Section 498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC') against the respondent and his family members.

3. After the conclusion of trial, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Mahila Court-02), Dwarka, New Delhi vide judgment dated 28.10.2015 had acquitted all the accused persons/respondents in the present FIR. Thereafter, the petitioner had preferred an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. which was also dismissed vide judgment dated 27.10.2017 by the learned ASJ, thereby affirming the decision of learned MM.

4. Aggrieved by the orders passed by both the Courts below, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of present revision petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was subjected to cruelty, and she was forced to leave her matrimonial home twice. It is stated that the petitioner was subjected to cruelty within the meaning of Section 498A of IPC, and the learned ASJ erred in interpreting it within the meaning of cruelty under Section 304B. It is further submitted that the testimony of one Sh. Praveen Gupta is not hearsay as he was closely related to the petitioner and the respondents, and had acted as mediator in their marriage. It is thus stated that both the Courts below had failed to appreciate the evidence correctly.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents states that there are no witnesses who support the case of complainant/petitioner, and the only public witness of the incident is a hearsay witness and his testimony cannot be relied upon. It is stated that the allegations of physical abuse are not corroborated by any medical record or MLC. It is further stated that the statements of the