The court emphasized the need to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt and found no illegality or infirmity in the judgment of the court below.

1. This criminal revision case has been preferred under Section 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code by the defacto complainant who was examined as P.W.1 in S.C.No.52 of 2005 on the file of Magalir Neethimandram (Mahila Court), Coimbatore against the judgment of the said court dated 30.08.2005 acquitting the first respondent herein/accused of the offences punishable under Sections 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sections 498-A, 306 and 304-B of Indian Penal Code with which he stood charged, tried and ultimately found not guilty. The second respondent herein was the complainant (investigating officer) in the said case.

2. As the wife of the first respondent/accused by name Vijayalakshmi died of burns on 24.03.2002 at Thattampudur village within the jurisdiction of Karumathampatti police station, Coimbatore district, the petitioner herein/P.W.1 who is the father of the deceased lodged a complaint on 25.03.2002 on the file of the said police station expressing suspicion over the death of his daughter and a case was registered in Crime No.60/2002 on the file of the said police station under Section 174 Cr.P.C. As the death occurred within seven years from the date of marriage, the Revenue Divisional Officer conducted inquest and the Deputy Superintendent of Police conducted investigation altered the case into one for offences punishable under Sections 306, 304-B and 498-A IPC. On completion of investigation, the Deputy Superintendent of Police submitted a final report against the first respondent herein/accused, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306 and 304-B IPC and an offence punishable under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. After the case was committed to the court below, necessary charges were framed and a trial was conducted pursuant to the plea of not guilty made by the first respondent herein/accused.

3. In the trial eight witnesses were examined as P.W.1 to 8, ten documents were marked as Ex.P1 to P10 and seven material objects were marked as M.O.1 to M.O.7 on the side of the prosecution. On the other hand, one witness was examined as D.W.1 and one document was marked as Ex.D1 and no material object was marked on the side of the defence. After examining the accused under Section 313(i)(b), the court below heard the arguments advanced on either side and considered the evidence in the light of such arguments. Upon considering the evidence, the court below came to the conclusion that none of the charges was proved beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly pronounced a judgment holding the first respondent herein/accused not guilty of any offence and acquitting him. The above said judgment of the acquittal dated 30.08.2005 is sought to be challenged in this criminal revision case.

4. Before embarking upon a discussion regarding the contentions raised on either side in this criminal revision case, it shall be helpful to state the prosecution case briefly. It can be stated, in brief, as follows:-

i) The marriage of the first respondent herein with the deceased Vijayalakshmi was performed on 07.06.1998. At the time of their marriage the petitioner herein/P.W.1, the father of the deceased Vijayalakshmi gave 20 sovereigns of gold and Rs.15,000/-as dowry. After marriage, for about one year, the first respondent herein/accused was working in a sizing mill in Sankarankoil, during which period there was no problem between the husband and wife and they led a peaceful life. The brothers of the first respondent/accused were running a hotel at Kaniyur-Thattamputhur, Coimbatore District. With an intention to set up his residence near the residence of his brothers, the first respondent herein/accused went to Thattamputhur and thereafter was working in a sizing mill there. Initially when he went to Thattampudur seeking employment in the Sizing mill he had left his wife, namely deceased Vijayalakshmi, at Sankarankoil, Tuticorin district. Thereafter he arranged a house for their residence at Kan