STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BHAGWANDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal, under Sec. 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgement and order dated 03.12.1993 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bhadra, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 24 of 1993 whereby the accused has been acquitted of the charges leveled against him under Ss. 302 and 498(A) of IPC.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the accused and the deceased were married to each other seven months prior to 19.09.1992 and were living together. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused was in a habit of consuming liquor and he used to inflict mental and physical torture upon the deceased. It is the case of the prosecution that whenever the deceased requested the accused to stop having liquor he used to assault her. On 19.09.1992 the accused returned home at around 09.30 pm in an inebriated state. The deceased asked him to stop consuming liquor and a quarrel ensued pursuant to which the accused in a fit of rage, took out a matchstick from his pocket and lighted the same and set the deceased ablaze. Hearing the cries of the deceased, one of the neighbours threw a quilt around her and she was taken to hospital for treatment. The deceased however succumbed to burn injuries on 25.09.1992. A complaint was therefore lodged against the accused. Pursuant to the complaint, investigation was carried out. After investigation, charge -sheet was filed and as the case was triable by the Court of Sessions, it was committed to the Court of Sessions.

(3.) Ms. C.M. Shah, learned APP appearing for the appellant -State has submitted that the trial court committed an error in releasing the respondent -accused. It was contended by Ms. Shah, that the judgement and order of the Sessions Court is against the provisions of law; the Sessions Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the prosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself it is established that the prosecution has proved the whole ingredients of the evidence against the present respondent. Learned APP has also taken this court through the oral as well as the entire documentary evidence.