JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant - State under Section 378(1) (3) of the Criminal procedure Code, 1973 (Code) against the judgment and order dated 25.10.2007 passed in Sessions Case No. 264 of 2006 by the learned Sessions Judge, Anand, recording the acquittal of the respondents - original accused for the charge levelled against them for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act r/w. Section 114 of the IPC.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that complainant Ranjitsinh Fulsinh Gohil, resident of Tarsali, Dist.: Vadodara registered a complaint against the respondents - accused inter alia stating that marriage of his daughter Varshaben @ Ushaben, now deceased, had been solemnized as per Hindu rites and rituals with the respondent No. 1 - original accused No. 1 on 23.01.2006. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 - original accused Nos. 2 and 3 are the parents-in-law of the deceased. That, after the marriage, they were residing in joint family. That, prior to about three months of the incident in question, the deceased when visited her parental home, she told the complain