JUDGMENT S.Z. Hasan, J. - This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated October 20, 1981 passed by Sri B.L. Sachdeva, VII Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow convicting and sentencing accused Banshi to four years R.I. under Section 307, I.P.C. 2. The prosecution case is that Smt. Laungsri (P.W.1), the daughter of Lalita (P.W.2), is married to Banshi accused. She has a daughter aged about 4 years. The complainant Laungsri suspected that her husband (accused) had illicit connection with his Bhaujai and on that score she used to be ill-treated by her husband. Ultimately she was turned out and was residing with her father where she filed a case under Section 125, Cr.P.C. On January 14, 1980 the accused appeared in the case and he brought the complainant to his house. While she was living at her husband's house, this occurrence took place. There are two rooms in the house. In one room the Jethani of the complainant, who was on good terms with her, was residing. The other inmates of the house were not present. The mother-in-law of the complainant was at the flour-mill. On March 11, 1980 at 7 p.m. a small kuppi was burning in the room. The accused took out the burning head of the kuppi and thereafter threw the kerosene oil contained in that kuppi on the head of the complainant and set fire with the hello of the aforesaid burning head of the kuppi. P.W.4 Nand Kishore, a relation of the complainant, sent a telegram to the father of the complainant Lalta Prasad (P.W.2) and thereafter a report was lodged on March 12, 1980 at 10.10 p.m. P.W.7 S.I. Hausala Prasad Pandey made investigation in this case. The medical examination took place on March 13, 1980 at 7.10 a.m. The accused denied the charge and stated that it was a case of suicide and he was falsely implicated. The learned trial Judge believed the prosecution version and sentenced the accused as aforesaid. Hence this appeal. 3. We have simply to decide whether it is a case of suicide or homicide. The Indian village woman was suspecting that her husband was carrying on with his Bhaujai and since she was not getting love of her husband, so she could commit suicide. Hence this appeal. 3. We have simply to decide whether it is a case of suicide or homicide. The Indian village woman was suspecting that her husband was carrying on with his Bhaujai and since she was not getting love of her husband, so she could commit suicide. It is said that the accused took out the burning head of the kuppi and thereafter poured the kerosene oil contained in the kuppi on the head of the lady and then set fire with the help of the aforesaid burning head of the kuppi. After the accused threw the kerosene oil, some struggle should have taken place and the wife should have tried to run away. It appears that nothing like that happened The prosecution case is that after she was set on fire she ran for about 6-7 paces towards her Jethani with whom she was on good terms, but she backed away in order to avoid herself being burnt. In this process the complainant fell on the balti and due to the water kept in the balti the fire was extinguished. This story is clearly absurd. There is also contradiction on this score because the other version is that she took out water from that balti and poured on herself and in this way the fire was extinguished. Here it would be important to mention the conduct of the accused and the complainant. The complainant was on friendly terms with her Jethani but it does not appear that she made any complaint to her. A storm must have been raised after the occurrence and village people must have assembled there. It does not appear that any such complaint was made by her to any villager or to doctor who examined her. The accused himself took his wife to the hospital for medical examination. It may be added that burn injuries were not of serious nature. He also gave a telegram to his father-in-law in this respect. It does not appear that he closed the doors after setting fire. So, to my mind, the solitary and interested testimony of this lady is inherently improbable and cannot pass the test of credibility. I was taken through the entire evidence and my impression is that the prosecution had failed to prove that it was a case of homicide. It does not appear that he closed the doors after setting fire. So, to my mind, the solitary and interested testimony of this lady is inherently improbable and cannot pass the test of credibility. I was taken through the entire evidence and my impression is that the prosecution had failed to prove that it was a case of homicide. It cannot be ruled out of poorly(sic) that was if was a case of suicide. 4. The appeal is allowed, the order of conviction and sentence is set aside and the appellant is acquitted of the charge referred to above. He is on bail. His bail bonds are discharged.