IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.54 of 2011 Hazrat Ali Dhobi son of lalte Nuri Dhobi, resident of Village Ishyia, P.S.Chainpur,District Kaimur(Bhabua) Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Mintu Dhobi son of Monib Dhobi 3. Alijan Dhobi son of Monib Dhobi 4. Haider Ali Dhobi son of Monib Dhobi 5. Amiran Bibi wife of Munir Dhobi 6. Monib Dhobi son of late Huassan Dhobi 7. Nabi Rasool Ansari son of Maula Ansari 8. Nasir Ansari son of Maula Ansari All residents of Village Sareya, P.S.Chakiya, District Chandauli( U.P) 9. Mahboob Dhobi son of Rasul Dhobi, resident of Village Illi, P.S.Saiyadraja, District Chandauli( U.P. … … Opp. Parties For the applicant: Shri Kumar Sunil ---------------------------------- 2. 9.11.2011 After having heard Shri Kumar Sunil, learned counsel for the applicant, who seeks Special Leave of the Court to challenge judgment of acquittal dated 19.8.2011 passed by the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhabua, in Complaint Case No. 1003 of 2005, Tr. No. 412 of 2011, what this Court finds is that, the learned Magistrate has rightly passed the judgment of acquittal. The reasons appear in paragraph 8 of the judgment which contains discussion on the material part of evidence of two witnesses, i.e., P.Ws. 2 and 3, who happen to be the lady as also the complainant, her father. P.W. 3, the father of the lady, stated that nothing was demand prior and it was only when his daughter (P.W. 2) had come from the house of her husband that he was told that the accused persons were demanding a motorcycle and a gold chain. As against that, the 2 lady herself stated that no demand was placed before her or in her presence before her father for fulfillment of the dowry. The learned Magistrate has considered the evidence and recorded a finding that there is vital contradiction which is relatable to the demand of dowry and on account of that the torture of the lady. In addition to the above, the story appears that the lady was brought from her matrimonial house to her parents’ house and abandoned there whereas the lady herself stated that she came from the matrimonial house herself. The learned Magistrate was recording a finding that when being pointedly asked question as to whether she was desirous of living with her husband, she dumped her husband by stating that she was never desirous of being reunited with her husband. The findings recorded by the learned Magistrate appear reasonable on the basis of the evidence and, as such, it could not be said to be suffering from perversity. The Court does not find any merit in the present application and, as such, the prayer for grant of Special Leave is hereby dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)