STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. VANRAJSINH SHIVAJI CHAUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant ' State under Sec. 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') against the judgment and the order dtd. 14/7/2008 in Sessions Case No.167 of 2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and 3rd Fast Track Court, Modasa (Sabalpur) (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial Court'), whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent ' accused from the offences punishable under Ss. 498-A, 306 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC'). The respondent is hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' as he stood in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

(2.) The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:

(3.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court, the appellant ' State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the prosecution has examined 9 witnesses and has produced 27 documentary evidences on record in support the case, but the learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence in proper perspective. The learned Trial Court has not considered the various decisions of the Apex Court and has not properly appreciated the ratio laid down by those judgments and also whether the same are applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case and therefore, the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court is perverse and suffers from legal and factual errors apparent on the record of the case. The learned Trial Court has erred in holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt as during the period of marriage life, the accused has caused the deceased mental and physical harassment, which has led the deceased to commit suicide. The learned Trial Court has also erred in holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt as due to harassment caused by the accused, the deceased along with her two children Ajay and Kinjal jumped in the well and the deceased and her son Ajay were expired. The learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence produced by the complainant and discarded and disbelieved the evidence while coming to the conclusion, which has resulted into serious miscarriage of justice. Even though, the witnesses have turned hostile, the learned Trial Court ought to have exercised the powers vested under the provisions of law to find out the truth to do proper justice and hence, the impugned judgment and order deserves to be quashed and set aside.