IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment reaffirms the principle that an appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal unless there is manifest illegality or perversity in the decision, and emphasizes the double presumption of innocence in favor of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.

1. By way of this Appeal, the Appellant-State is aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal dated 30.03.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, Jamnagar in Sessions Case Nos. 113 of 2006 and 114 of 2006 whereby the respondents were acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) read with Sections 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The case of the prosecution is as under:

2.1. The complainant-Nanjibhai Arjanbhai Dhokia registered a complaint with ‘B’ Division Police Station, Jamnagar City stating that his daughter got married with the (husband) accused No. 1-Rameshbhai Karshanbhai Gohil about two years prior to the date of incident. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the sister-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the deceased. It is alleged that after six months of the married life, the respondents started torturing mentally and physically the victim and as result of which, she committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her body and setting herself on fire.

2.2. On the basis of the complaint filed, the investigation commenced. Charges were framed against all the original accused in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class. Since it was a Sessions triable case, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class committed the case to the Court of Sessions.

2.3. At the time of the trial, the prosecution examined the following witnesses:

The prosecution also relied upon various documentary evidence, some of them are:

The prosecution also relied upon various documentary evidence, some of them are:

2.4. At the end of the trial, further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded in which the respondents pleaded not guilty and stated that they have been falsely implicated in the offence. Thus, after recording the further statement of the accused and hearing the arguments of both the sides, the learned Additional Sessions Judge passed the impugned judgment and order. Being aggrieved by the same, the present Appeal has been filed by the State, as aforesaid.

3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Dhawan Jayswal for the appellant – State has taken this Court to the medical evidence and has submitted that the presence of the accused is proved in the commission of the crime. It is further submitted that learned Judge has erred in discarding the evidence of the complainant, whose evidence gets corroborated from the First Information Report which was lodged after the incident. It is also submitted that the learned Judge has failed to appreciate the evidence of the PW-1, father of the deceased (the complainant). In addition, the evidence of PW-2, the mother of deceased also establishes that the deceased was subjected to physical and mental torture. In addition, the