The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for consistency and credibility in evaluating evidence in criminal trials, emphasizing the principle that no man is guilty until proven so.

JUDGMENT

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) - Instant criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 Cr.PC, is directed against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 3.10.2007, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Barsar, District Hamirpur, H.P., whereby the respondent-Accused came to be acquitted of charge framed against him under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC.

2. Briefly stated facts as emerge from the record are that an FIR Ext.PW1/A came to be registered against the respondent-Accused at the behest of the complainant namely Promila Devi, who alleged that her marriage was solemnized with the Accused in the year, 2004 at Deotsidh Temple as per Hindu rites. After two months of marriage, respondent-Accused apart from giving beatings also started demanding dowry and on 28.8.2006, Accused allegedly gave beatings to the complainant in the presence of one Sanjiv Kumar i.e. relative of the complainant. Thereafter, on 8.9.2006, the complainant received one summon from Gram Panchayat Galore Khas, whereby she was called upon to appear before the Panchayat on 15.9.2006. Accordingly, complainant, her mother and her brother namely Dinesh Kumar appeared before the Gram Panchayat on 15.9.2006, wherein Accused allegedly again gave beatings to the complainant at about 1:30 p.m. in the presence of Up-Pradhan, lady ward member, mother and brother of the complainant. As per the complainant, brother and mother of the complainant saved him from the clutches of the Accused. Complainant also alleged that she was subjected to mental as well as physical cruelty. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, a case came to be registered against the respondent Accused. After completion of investigation, police presented challan in the competent Court of law under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC.

3. Learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Barsar, District Hamirpur, H.P., on being satisfied that prima-facie case exists against the respondent-Accused put notice of accusation to him for having committed offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution with a view to prove its case examined as many as six witnesses, whereas respondent-Accused in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.PC, denied all the allegations levelled against him and claimed himself to be innocent. Though respondent Accused did not lead any evidence in his defence but he furnished documents Exts.D1 to D3. Learned court below on the basis of material adduced on record by the prosecution, acquitted the respondent-Accused of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC. In the aforesaid background, appellant-State has approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, seeking therein conviction of the respondent-Accused after setting aside judgment of acquittal recorded by the learned court below.

4. Mr. M.L. Chauhan, learned Additional Advocate General, while inviting attention of this Court to the impugned judgment of acquittal recorded by the court below, strenuously argued that the impugned judgment passed by the learned court below is not sustainable in the eye of law as the same is not based upon the proper appreciation of evidence and as such, same deserves to be quashed and set-aside. With a view to substantiate his aforesaid arguments, Mr. Chauhan made this court to travel through the impugned judgment of acquittal vis-a-vis evidence led on record by the prosecution to demonstrate that prosecution successfully proved on record that respondent Accused demanded dowry from the complainant and also gave beatings to her in presence of her mother and brother. Mr. Chauhan, while specifically inviting attention of this court to the statements of PW1 (complainant), PW3 (mother) and PW4 (brother of the complainant), contended that bare perusal of depositions made by these aforesaid witnesses clearly proves on record that an amount of Rs. 80,000/- was demanded by the respondent-Accused as a dowry from the complainant a