IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Revision No. 1199 of 2002. Date of Decision: February 23, 2007. Balwinder Devi ....Petitioner through Mr. B.S.Baath, Advocate. Versus Harinder Kumar & Ors. . ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT,J.(ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the the judgment and order dated 13.11.2001 whereby in a case under Section 498-A and 506 IPC, the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balachaur acquitted respondents No. 1 and 2, who are brother-in-law (Devar) and mother-in-law respectively of the petitioner-complainant. It may, however, be stated that the husband of the petitioner, namely, Subhash Chander was held guilty and was accordingly convicted for the afore-stated offence. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the impugned order. On a plain reading of the impugned order, it is apparent that the allegations made against respondents No. 1 and 2 are not at all specific and are of evasive nature. The petitioner attempted to Criminal Revision No.1199 of 2002. ::-2-:: rope in both the respondents by alleging that they too gave beatings to her. However, no cogent medical evidence to substantiate the said allegations was produced. Learned Judicial Magistrate also took notice of the fact that respondent No.2 is an old and feeble lady whereas respondent No.1 was implicated only to widen the net. Since the aforesaid findings neither suffer from the infirmity of perversity nor are based upon misreading of the evidence on record, no interference by this Court is called for. Dismissed. February 23, 2007. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE