MANJUSHA NAMJOSHI, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal under Section 378 of the Cr. P. C. has been preferred by the State of M. P. against the judgment and acquittal recorded by Judicial Magistrate (JMFC)1st Class, Raisen in criminal Case No. 160/83. ( 2 ) THE non-appellant Habib Mustafa was charged under Section 304 A of the I. P. C. for causing death of Bhagwandas by rash and negligent act by injecting injection, though he was not a qualified doctor. The learned trial court after appreciating the evidence available on record has found that the charge was not proved against the non-appellant/accused. ( 3 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution the deceased was drenched in rain and caught fever and therefore, he contacted the accused who injected an injection and it reacted: thereafter the accused took him to Hamidia Hospital on the very day that is 22. 7. 83, where he took his last breath, within one hour from the time he was admitted in the hospital. The complainant could not get the postmortem report and death certificate. Thereafter he made a complaint to Collector on 16. 9. 83 and case was registered by Police Station Salamatpur, District raisen. The post-mortem report (Exhibit 1) reveals that death was due to cardio respiratory failure as a result of gas gangenne appears to be the result of complication of injection pride. Site of injection and viscera was preserved. The prosecution examined six witnesses to prove the case. ( 4 ) IN the light of aforesaid evidence available on record parties to the appeal did not dispute about the death of the victim Bhagwan das. Thus, it is not necessary to deal with the aspect of the matter any further. ( 5 ) ON charge sheet being filed, the accused/ non appellant abjured his guilt and pleaded that he has been falsely implicated in the case. There is no iota of evidence on record to record a conviction against the accused/non-appellant. PW-2 Bhikam Sing, PW-3 Malam Sing and pw-5 Mehar All and PW6 Suresh Kumar are declared hostile by the prosecution and does not support the case. PW4 Dr. Mohammad Vasim Khan says that deceased did not come to his residence on 22. 7. 83. There is no iota of evidence on record to record a conviction against the accused/non-appellant. PW-2 Bhikam Sing, PW-3 Malam Sing and pw-5 Mehar All and PW6 Suresh Kumar are declared hostile by the prosecution and does not support the case. PW4 Dr. Mohammad Vasim Khan says that deceased did not come to his residence on 22. 7. 83. His son did come to him and requested him to visit his house and examine his father and therefore, he went there and saw that there was swelling on one hand and there were few blisters on his person, but this does not mean that it was accused who inflicted some injection to the deceased. This witness does not know any thing more. PW 1 Dr. D. K. Satpati of Medical College, Bhopal, who performed post-mortem has proved his post-mortem report (P. 1 ). The findings have been stated in previous paragraph of this judgment. According to postmortem report the death was due to the injection injected to the deceased, but who injected the same has not been proved by the prosecution. ( 6 ) THE prosecution has requested that proper opportunity was not given to it to prove the case as some times witnesses use to come but the presiding officer was not available and vice versa. The case was registered on 20. 12. 83 and several opportunities were given to the prosecution and ultimately the judgment was pronounced on 26. 4. 90, that the case was pending for more than six years and six months. Therefore, the contention of the prosecution can not be accepted. Looking to the nature and circumstances of the case, it is not proper to remand this case after 15 years from the time of filing of the appeal. ( 7 ) IN the result, the appeal is dismissed. Since accused is on bail, his bail bonds are discharged. Appeal dismissed. .