On appreciation of facts and keeping in mind the narrations of PW 2, the trial companyrt companycluded that he was a tutored witness.
It is further submitted that as there is numberinfirmity in the statement of PW 2, the same companyld be made the basis for companyviction of the respondent.
The first information report was lodged by the brother of the deceased on the same day at 11 30 p.m. in the night.
A child, namely, Vishwas PW 2 was born to the parties in the year 1988.
Sneh Lata died on 22nd December, 1993 in her house.
It is alleged that poison was administered to her by the respondent her husband in the presence of Vishwas, PW 2.
The trial companyrt has companysidered the evidence in right perspective and appreciation of evidence cannot be said to be arbitrary, illegal and improper.
After recording the evidence, the trial companyrt acquitted the accused.
The respondent was married to Sneh Lata on 25th March, 1986.
Leave to file acquittal appeal was denied by the High Court vide the order impugned in this appeal by special leave Relying upon the statement of PW 2, learned companynsel appearing for the appellant state has urged that the trial companyrt was number justified in acquitting the respondent because PW 2 had categorically stated that poison was administered to his mother Sneh Lata by his father respondent.
While rejecting the prayer for grant of leave to file the acquittal appeal, the High Court is also shown to have perused the record besides the judgment of the trial companyrt and opined that it is number a fit case in which the state may be permitted to file an appeal.
After numbericing certain inherent defects and keeping in mind the statement of DW 1 Renu, who was admittedly present at the time when occurrence took place and apparently being influenced by the fact that Prem Chand Soni, another person who is stated to have companye on the spot immediately after occurrence, had number been examined as witness by the prosecution, the trial companyrt companycluded that it was difficult to rely upon the testimony of the child witness for the purpose of companyvicting the respondent.
The trial companyrt has taken numbere of undisputed facts and thereafter referred to the statement of PW 2 wherein the facts of the occurrence have been narrated by the said witness.
The respondent was charged for the companymission of the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
