The central legal point established in the judgment is that when there is genuine doubt about the prosecution's case, the accused is entitled to acquittal.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in S.C.No.164 of 2017 on the file of the learned Session Judge (Fast Track Mahila Court), Krishnagiri District, dated 05.10.2021 and set aside the judgment dated 05.10.2017 made in S.C.No.164 of 2017.)

1.The criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Krishnagiri District dated 05.10.2021 in S.C.No.164 of 2017.

2. The appellant is the first accused in S.C.No.164 of 2017 on the file of the Sessions (Fast Track Mahila) Court, Krishnagiri District. The prosecution case is that the marriage between the deceased Sathya and the appellant/A1 took place on 05.07.2012. Thereafter, the appellant/A1 continuously harassed the petitioner by demanding jewells, two wheeler and 407 Vehicle, due to which, on 08.04.2015 at about 10.00 p.m., she committed suicide by hanging. Initially, a case has been registered for the offence under Section 174(3) Cr.P.C. Based on the complaint given by one Murugan, who is father of the deceased. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed under Section 304(B) IPC against the appellant/A1 and 6 other accused. The Trial Court framed charges as against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 304(B) of IPC.

3. During trial, the prosecution examined 17 witnesses viz., P.W.1 to P.W.17 and marked 14 documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P14 and on the side of the accused, the first accused Mayavan @ Mariappan examined himself as D.W.1 and also filed the medical reports of the deceased Sathya Sathya as Ex.D1.

4. The Trial Court, after Trial, acquitted the 2 to 7 accused from the charges and found the appellant/A1 guilty for the following offences and convicted and sentenced them as follows;              

Aggrieved by this conviction and sentence, the appellant/A1 had filed this present criminal appeal.

5 .The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the finding of the Trial Court is contrary to the evidence on record. There is a delay in lodging the complaint. According to the prosecution, the occurrence took place on 08.04.2015 and the complaint was given on 12.06.2015, but the delay is not properly explained. The Trial Court overlooked this fact and mechanically found the appellant guilty and there is no evidence for demanding dowry. Apart from this, the cause of the death of the deceased was not found and there is no medical evidence for the same. Admittedly, panchayath has took place, in which the defacto complainant demanded the accused to give a house in his wife''s name. Since the accused refused, the case has been registered. The Trial Court overlooked the evidence of P.W.1 in cross in this aspect and found the appellant/A1 guilty. The prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond all reasonable doubts and the appellant/A1 is entitled for acquittal. He further reiterated the facts raised in the grounds of appeal. Therefore, the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court is to be set aside and the accused is to be acquitted and the criminal appeal is to be allowed. Thus, pleaded to allow the criminal appeal.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent supported the judgment of the Trial Court and submitted that there is no ground to interfere with the finding of the Trial court and there is no merit in the criminal appeal and thus, pleaded to dismiss the Criminal Appeal.

7. I have considered the matter in the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for th