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.)