THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. HARI EKNATH DESAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present application, the applicant State seeks leave to file an appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 24th April, 2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan, thereby acquitting accused Nos. 1 to 5 for the offences punishable under Section 498-A read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and further acquitting accused No. 1, for the offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as I.P.C. for the sake of brevity).

(2.) Shri H.J. Dedhia, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State submitted that the learned Trial Judge has failed to consider evidence of PW-1, the victim which was fully corroborated by the evidence of PW-3, her brother and PW-4 - her friend, which evidence establish the ingredients of Section 498-A of I.P.C. According to the learned A.P.P., the learned Trial Judge has further failed to consider evidence of victim on the point of A-1 forcibly administering phenyl to her and about his beating, in spite of said evidence being convincing and corroborated by the evidence of PW-2, minor daughter of the victim, supported with medical evidence and C.A. report. By referring to above evidence, the learned A.P.P. thus prayed that the application be allowed.

(3.) To prove the charges levelled against the accused, prosecution has examined as many as 15 witnesses. PW-1 Shobha, the complainant wife of A-1 who, at the material time, was posted as Ladies Police Constable in Thane District and was married to A-1 about eight years prior to the incident. According to her evidence, after the period of six months of her marriage she was subjected to ill-treatment by all the accused and that since A-1 had extramarital relations, he used to not to bring any grocery articles in the house. She has also deposed that A-1 used to spend his entire salary upon his family members alone due to which she was required to spend for herself out of her own income and that A-1, on the contrary, was demanding money from the complainant herself. It is also her evidence that A-1 used to suspect her character and on this count she was subjected to beating.