IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment reinforces the principle that an acquittal should not be overturned unless there is clear evidence of legal error or misjudgment by the trial court.

ORDER :

1. This Criminal Appeal under Section 378 (iii) & (i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the appellant-State laying a challenge to the judgment of acquittal dated 16.02.2001 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Jodpur in Sessions Case No.38/99 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Sohan Lal & Ors.), whereby the accused-respondents were acquitted of the charges against them under Sections 498-A, 304-B & 302 of IPC.

2. The matter pertains to an incident which had occurred in the year 1999 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 2001.

3. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by Mr. Sameer Pareek, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the appellant-State, are that on 29.01.1999, at about 11.45 A.M, a report was lodged by one Harlal Vishnoi at concerned Police Station (Ex.P-8) wherein it was alleged that five years ago, his daughter Pista was married to the accused Sohan Lal, and after about two years of marriage, his daughter was harassed and physically abused by her husband. It was also alleged in the report that after being subjected to continuous harassment, four months ago, his daughter Pista came to his house and on the night of the incident, at about 9.00 P.M., her husband came there. Next day when the mother of the deceased and sister-in-law (Bhabhi) went to her room in the morning, she was lying dead while accused Sohan Lal had disappeared from the site.

4. On the basis of the aforementioned information, an FIR was registered and the investigation commenced accordingly. After investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet against the accused respondents. Thereafter, the learned Trial Court framed the charges against accused Mangilal for the offence under Section 498-A and 304-B of IPC and Sohan Lal for the offence under Sections 498-A, 304-B in alternative 302 of IPC; the said charges were read over and explained to the accused respondents, which they denied and claimed to stand due trial and trial commenced accordingly.

5. During the course of trial, the evidence of 14 prosecution witnesses were recorded and 25 documents were exhibited on behalf of the prosecution and 4 documents were exhibited on behalf of the accused-respondents; whereafter, the accused-respondents were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which the accused respondents pleaded innocence and their false implication in the criminal case in question.

6. Thereafter, upon hearing the contentions of both the parties as well as considering the material and evidence placed on record, the learned Trial Court, acquitted the accused-respondents, vide the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 16.02.2001, against which the present appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-State.

7. Mr. Sameer Pareek, learned AGA submits that there are presumptions, which have to be drawn because the marriage was solemnized five years ago and she has also been subjected to harassment, and thus, the burden of proof in the criminal jurisprudence involving Section 304-B of IPC requires a stricter view to be taken by the learned trial court.

7.1 Learned AGA further submits that the poison might have been administered by the husband, as he was there with the deceased at the night preceding the death. He also submits that the evidence of harassment by the father-in-law and the son (husband of the deceased) was brought on record, and thus, it is a clear case where the conviction ought to have been arrived at by the learned trial court.

8. On the other hand, Mr. Suresh Kumbhat along with Mr. Sheetal Kumbhat and Mr. Naman Bhansali, learned counsel representing the accused-respondents, while opposing the submissions made on behalf of the appellant-State, submits that while the date of incident is 28.01.1999, it was reported on 29.01.1999 in the intervening night, it is clear from the post-mortem report as well as description of the crime scene that the deceased Pista did not have any kind of physical injuries on her body or nor was the