Evidence must substantiate charges for dowry-related offenses; acquittal upheld due to lack of credible proof.

1. This criminal revision has been filed by the parents of the deceased Chitrarekha under S.397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C') against the judgment dated 27/08/2002 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Mungeli in Session Trial No. 200 of 2000, whereby, the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have been acquitted from the offence punishable under S.498 - A / 34 and 304 - B / 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC'). The State Government has also questioned the propriety of this judgment while filing the appeal under S.378 of the Cr.P.C., which is registered as Acquittal Appeal No. 445 of 2010.

2. Since the common questions of law and facts are involved in both these matters, therefore, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

3. The undisputed facts are that the respondent No. 2 Narendra was married to deceased Chitrarekha and the allegation leveled against the accused persons are that immediately after the marriage deceased Chitrarekha has expired on 28.3.2000 in a suspicious circumstances as she was subjected to cruelty and harassment on account of demand of dowry of Motorcycle, Colour T.V., Ornaments etc. Therefore, a charge - sheet under S.498 - A / 34 and 304 - B / 34 of the IPC was registered against the accused persons.

4. Further prosecution story is that the marriage of deceased Chitrarekha with respondent No. 2 - Narendra had taken place in the month of Jeth (May - June), 1999 and after the marriage, deceased Chitrarekha had gone to her in - laws house, where she was tortured physically and mentally in connection with the demand of Motorcycle, Colour T.V., Ornaments etc. Because of the alleged harassment, the deceased went back to her father' s house twice, but at the instance of elder members, she returned back to her in - laws house. At last, when she returned to her in - laws house on 24/03/2000, but, was again tortured there, as a result of which, she expired on 28/03/2000 at about 4 p.m. by poisoning.

5. After receiving the information with regard to the aforesaid incident, the father of the deceased Narad Prasad, maternal grandfather Arjun Prasad Chandrawanshi with other persons rushed to her in - laws house where they found the dead body of deceased Chitrarekha in a suspicious condition. The maternal grandfather of the deceased, namely Arjun Prasad Chandrawanshi had lodged a First Information Report in the Police Station Pandatarai, based on which, a merg intimation was written by the police on 29/03/2000 and an offence punishable under S.304 - B read with S.34 of the IPC was registered against all the accused persons, who were husband, father - in - law, mother - in - law and brother - in - law of the deceased Chitraleka as the alleged incident had taken place within a period of seven years of the said marriage.

6. Respondents Nos. 1 to 4 have not accepted the charges as framed and pleaded not guilty by submitting that they have been falsely implicated by the parents of the deceased in connection with the said crime.

7. In support, the prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses including father, mother, grandfather and maternal grandfather of the deceased Chitrarekha, while one defence witness was produced by the accused persons in order to establish their innocence in connection with the said crime.

8. After examining the statement adduced by both the parties, the trial Court by its impugned judgment dated 27/08/2002 has acquitted all the accused persons from the offence punishable under S.498 - A / 34 and 304 -