IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.41 of 2011 Firoza Begum Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- 2. 19.8.2011 After having heard Shri Jagdish Prasad , learned counsel for the applicant, who was complainant in the court below, on acquittal of the respondents of the charges under Sections 323,504,420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, what this Court feels obliged to record is that Shri Parasad was quite fair in conceding that offences under Sections 420 and 468 of the Penal Code may not be made out on facts. However, Shri Prasad was pressing hard upon me to issue notices to the opposite parties, herein, as the facts may constitute offences under Sections 323 and 504 of the Penal Code. After being pointed out that mere hurling an abuse may not constitute an offence under Section 504 of the Penal Code, Shri Prasad was fair enough in conceding that and, lastly, came to accept also that the evidence was lacking as regards acquittal of respondents for charge under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, but submitted that sufficient evidence was on record to prove the charge under Section 323. What was conceded by Shri Prasad was that the accused were armed with a sale deed duly executed by the husband of the complainant/present applicant and they might be within their rights to use some amount of force to repel the claim of the complainant for any share in the crops which they had grown. 2 Any dispute or obstruction which might have been caused by the complainant in exercise of the right of the accused either on their purchased property or in respect of crops grown by them could have been repelled justifiably in exercise of their right of private defence and, as such, the offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code also does not appear constituting. After having considered the facts, the Court does not find any merit in the present application seeking leave of the Court to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 23.5.2011 passed by Shri Abhishek Ranjan, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Jamui, in Case No.221C of 2004, Trial No. 579 of 2009. The petition is dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)