The appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or perverse, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.

JUDGMENT :

(S.V. PINTO, J.)

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant- State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 6, Veraval (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 59 of 2006 on 31.12.2007, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 306 and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter referred to as "IPC" for short).

1.1] The respondents are hereinafter referred to as “the accused” as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:

2.1] The respondent No. 1 was married to deceased Leelaben about 8 years prior to the incident and the respondent Nos. 2 and 5 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively, the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are the brothers-in-law and respondent No. 6 and 7 are the sisters-in-law of deceased Leelaben. The complainant Ramjibhai @ Meramanbhai - Mangabhai Champada filed a complaint on 01/05/2006, mainly stating that during the marital life of his sister Leela with the accused No. 1, three daughters were born and all the accused used to mentally and physically harass his sister Leela to bring money from her parental home. On 01/05/2006 at around 09:15 p.m., the accused No. 1, telephoned the complainant and told him that his sister had left at around 10.30 a.m. and she could not be found and hence he and his other relatives went to Chitravad and found that his sister was not traceable and hence a missing person report was filed at the Talala Police Station. On 11/04/2006, the dead body of Leela was found from the well of Jamalbhai Munnabhai at Chitravad and hence the complainant filed the complaint on 1/5/2006 at 17:00 hours at the Talala Police Station under Sections 306, 498-A, 323, and 114 of the IPC, which was registered at I-C.R.35 of 2006 before the Talala Police Station.

2.2] The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and the necessary documents were seized and after completion of investigation the police filed the chargesheet before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Talala and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Veraval as per the provisions of Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and case was registered Sessions Case No. 59 of 2006.

2.3] The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court, and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code and a charge at Exh. 1 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs.2 to 8, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.4] The prosecution produced nine oral evidences and thirty documentary evidences to bring home the charge against the accused and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing pursis at Exh. 62, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. The accused refused to step into the witness box or examine witnesses on their behalf and stated that a false case has been filed against them. After the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned trial Court by the impugned judgment and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from all the charges leveled against them.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgement and order of acquittal, the appel