The prosecution failed to establish the elements of cruelty under Section 498A IPC beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the upholding of acquittal by the appellate court.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA th ON THE 19 OF AUGUST, 2025 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 911 of 2012 SMT.FOMA Versus STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Brijendra Singh Gour - Advocate for the petitioner [P-1].

Shri P.K.Kulshreshtra - AAG for the respondent/State.

ORDER The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision under Section

397/401 of Cr.P.C. against impugned order dated 27.08.2012 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Dabra District Gwalior in Cr.Appeal No.352 of 2012 reversing the judgment dated 29.06.2012 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, I Class Dabra Camp Bhiterwar Distt. Gwalior in Cr.Case No.301 of 2010, acquitting the respondents No.2 to 7 from the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC.

2. Admitted facts of the case are that, complainant Smt. Foma is the wife of respondent No.7 Chandrabhan and respondent No.2 Ganesh Ram and respondent No.5 Smt. Rambai are her Father-in-law and Mother-in-law and respondent No.3 Surjana is her Uncle-in-law and respondent No.4 Madhav Singh and respondent No.6 Kunthibai are her Jeth and Jethani.

3. Brief facts giving rise to this revision, are that complainant Foma Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAM KUMAR Baghel filed a complaint before JMFC Dabra alleging that her marriage was solemnized with respondent No.7 Chandrabhan and at the time of marriage, her father gave cash amount, cooler, fan, Sewing machine, almirah, fridge, cycle, T.V, jewellery and household goods. After some time of marriage, her husband and other in-laws started harassing her for non-fulfillment of demand of Rs.50,000/-and a motorcycle. Thereafter, on 02.09.2009, her husband and other accused also beat her, then she tried to lodge the FIR but the FIR was not registered, and thereafter at the instance of trial court, the complaint could be registered against the respondents.

4. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against respondents No.2 to 7/accused persons. The trial court has framed charges under Section 498A of IPC. The respondents/accused abjured their guilt and pleaded innocence. The prosecution has examined five witnesses while the defence has examined only one witness. The Trial Court on the basis of the evidence, convicted the respondents No.2 to 7 for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo one year's RI with fine of Rs.500/-. Being aggrieved by the same, the respondents No.2 to 7 have preferred a revision before the appellate court which was allowed acquitting the respondents No.2 to 7 from the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid complainant/petitioner has preferred this criminal revision before this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned judgment passed by the lower appellate court is illegal and bad in law. The court below has not legally appreciated the evidence recorded during the Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAM KUMAR trial. The petitioner/complainant Foma Baghel has categorically stated regarding the cruelty meted out by her at the hands of the respondents No.2 to 7/accused. Her statement is well supported by her father Hotam Singh (PW2) and mother Meera Bai (PW3) and the FIR Ex.P/1 but the lower appellate court has ignored the evidence available on record. The complainant and his family members are villagers and the prosecution case is based upon the private complaint filed by the petitioner, therefore, the minor contradictions can come in the evidence of prosecution witnesses which will not be fatal for prosecution. Therefore, he prayed that the judgment of first appellate court be set-aside and the judgment passed by the trial court convicting the respondents No.2 to 7accused for the offence punishable under section 498A of IPC b