IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR NIRANKARI CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 38 of 1998 THE STATE OF M.P.

Versus SUBHASH BHOSLE AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Pramod Pandey - Government Advocate for the appellant/State.

Shri Amit Verma - Advocate for the respondents.

Heard on :- 21/01/2026 Pronounced on :- 24/02/2026 .......................................................................................................................................................................................

JUDGMENT Per: Justice Ajay Kumar Nirankari The instant criminal appeal has been preferred by the State of M.P.

th against the judgment dated 8/07/1997 passed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal (M.P.) in S.T. No.305/1996 whereby the respondents have been acquitted from the charge of Sections 498-A, 304-B and 306 of I.P.C.

2. Complainant Saheb Rao (PW-11) made a written complaint Ex. P-28 to the authority of Police Station Nishantpura, District Bhopal (M.P.) with the allegation that my daughter Ranjana's marriage was solemnized with respondent no.1 Subhash Bhosele on 26/11/1995 with Hindu rituals and customs. Near about 1 month, my daughter remained in a matrimonial house peacefully. Thereafter, the respondents started harassing and ill- treating her with cruelty for demand of 5 tolas gold. He further alleged that his daughter regularly visited her parental house and told to her mother that the respondents are harassing her for little disputes. She further informed her mother that the respondents are regularly demanding five tolas of gold from her. Due to said harassment, my daughter was burnt.

3. On the said application, the F.I.R. under Crime No.324/1996 under Section 498-A of I.P.C. was registered at Police Station Nishantpura. The police authority started the investigation and arrested the accused persons. During investigation, deceased Ranjana died on 31/05/1996. The police authority prepared the lash panchnama and sent the dead body for postmortem. During investigation, the articles have been seized and the statement of family members were recorded. Prior to that, the police authority had also recorded the statement of the deceased Ex. P-37. The police authority after concluding the investigation, filed a chargesheet before the competent Magistrate.

4. The learned Magistrate after appreciating the chargesheet, committed the case and sent the case for trial to the Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Court registered the case as S.T. No.38/1998 and framed the charges against the respondents under Sections 498-A and 304-B of I.P.C. and in alternate 306 of I.P.C. The respondents refused to accept the charges and wished to face the trial.

5. The prosecution substantiated its case, examined as many as 20 prosecution witnesses PW-1 to PW-20 and also exhibited the documents. The respondents in their deposition under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. submits that they have not committed any offence. They are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated. They have never made any demand for dowry at any point of time. The deceased herself by pouring kerosene oil set fire, resultantly, she has died. They have also examined DW-1 Sandhya Bhosele in support of their defence.

6. The learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 8/07/1997 acquitted the respondents from the charges under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 306 of I.P.C. by holding that the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond any reasonable doubt.

7. Against the said judgment, the instant appeal has been preferred by the State Government on the ground that the learned trial court has not properly appreciated the relevant material on record and acquitted the respondents by recording the perverse findings.

8. Learned Government Advocate has advanced the arguments that father of the deceased has made a written complaint to the police station just after the incident in which, he specifically alleged that