IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SLA No.17 of 2011
ARTI DEVI
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
-----------
3/ 30.3.2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant Arti Devi, who
was the complainant of Complaint Case no. 1003 of 2006, giving
rise to Trial No. 1726 of 2010.
The lady complainant was the wife of respondent
Saligram Sah and the two were married in the year 1994. She stated
that after marriage she went to her matrimonial house and was
residing there but, a Rajdoot motorcycle was demanded, which was
declined by the lady on the ground that financial position of her
parents was not very good and on that account accused persons ill
treated and tortured her and lastly, in spite of some intervention by
the father of the lady, the complainant was turned out of the
matrimonial house.
The judgment of acquittal passed by the SDJM, Saran at
Chapra in the above noted case on 20th August, 2010 indicates that
out of five witnesses, who were examined under section 244 of the
Cr.P.C., P.W. 1, who was the brother of the present petitioner, was
not turning up for his cross-examination and other witnesses,
besides herself, i.e., P.W. 5 and her father P.W. 4, no one was again
turning up for cross-examination. In addition to that, other witnesses
who were either cited in the complaint petition or who could have
come forward to depose in support of the complainant’s case did not
2
turn up.
After having said the above, the trial magistrate went on to
scan the evidence and read the probability and recorded that
everything appeared going fine and only when the respondent no. 2,
Shaligram Sah, had filed a petition for dissolution of marriage to the
lady, the lady was coming out with the complaint petition. The
learned trial magistrate has noted that the marriage was solemnized
in 1994 and till 2006, prior to the filing of the complaint petition,
there was no whisper of the demand of motorcycle and that
allegation also was not getting support from any independent source.
The defence as noted by the trial magistrate appears taken
by the respondents and by considering that, the learned magistrate
has rightly held that the complainant failed to prove the charges
beyond reasonable doubt.
Considering the judgment of acquittal under appeal, this
court does not find any merit in the application seeking special leave
to appeal and the same is dismissed.
Anil/ ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)