In acquittal appeals, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only interfere when the trial court's view is unreasonable or perverse.

JUDGMENT :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. The appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378 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. 4, Rajkot (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Sessions Case No. 151/2008 on 31.03.2011, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 498(A) and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as “the accused” in the rank and file 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 accused no. 1 was married to Shabanaben - the daughter of the complainant - Bashirbhai Sulemanbhai Sama. The accused no. 2 is the father-in-law, accused no. 3 - the mother-in-law and accused no. 4 - the brother-in-law of deceased Shabanaben and on 24.09.2008 at around 08.30 pm when the complainant was going to break his fast, his brother-in-law Zakir telephoned him and told him that Shabana had consumed poison and was in the hospital under treatment. The complainant went to the hospital and met his daughter Shabana and she told him that she had consumed the tablets used to preserve wheat as she was fed up of the mental and physical harassment by the accused and as she could not bear it any longer, she had taken the tablets. She expired during treatment and the complainant filed the complaint at the Rajkot City Gandhigram Police Station under Section 306, 498A, 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which came to be registered at Gandhigram Police Station I – C.R. No. 452 of 2008.

2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a charge- sheet came to be filed before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajkot and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Rajkot as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Sessions Case No. 151/2008

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. A charge at Exh. 7 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused was recorded at Exhs. 8, 9, 10 and 11 wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.4 The prosecution examined 12 witnesses and produced 19 documentary evidences on record in support of their case and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing pursis, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded. 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 judgement and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from the charges levelled against them.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the fact that all the witnesse