REKHA Vs. KIRAN KUMAR & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment dated 29.10.2003 passed by the Special Judge (SC, ST), Mandleshwar in Cri. Appeal No. 167/2005, whereby the judgment dated 15.9.2005 passed by the J.M.F.C., Mandleshwar in Cri. Case No. 420/2004, whereby the respondents No. 1 to 8 were convicted for an offence punishable under Section 498 -A and 506 -B IPC for a period of three years with fine of Rs. 200/ - and Rs. 100/ - respectively, was set aside, the present petition has been filed.

(2.) SHORT facts of the case are that respondent No. 9 prosecuted the respondents No. 1 to 8 alleging that the petitioner is wife of respondent No. 3 while other respondents are the family members of respondent No. 3. Further case of the prosecution was that marriage of sister of petitioner was taken place in the same family. It was alleged that after marriage petitioner and her sister was subjected to cruelty on account of demand of dowry. Upon this complaint was lodged by the petitioner against respondents No. 1 to 8 and after investigation challan was filed against respondents No. 1 to 8. After framing of charges and recording of evidence respondents were convicted, against which an appeal was filed, which was allowed and the judgment passed by the trial Court was set aside, against which the present petition has been filed.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner argued at length and submits that the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court is illegal and deserves to be set aside. It is submitted that to prove the offence sufficient evidence was on record. It is submitted that the findings of the learned appellate Court in presence of the evidence available of record is perverse and deserves to be set aside. It is submitted that the petition filed by the petitioner be allowed and the impugned judgment passed by the learned appellate Court be set aside and the respondents be convicted. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the matter of Madhu Sonkar vs. State of M.P., reported in, 2001 (1) MPLJ 384, wherein a Division Bench of this Court has observed that in a case where material evidence has been overlooked by the trial Court, interference can be made in exceptional cases.