IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.A.No.294 of 2001 Reserved on 28.2.2008 Date of decision 7.3.2008 State of H.P. Appellant Versus Yashpal and anr. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant: Mr.Anil Kumar Jaswal, Deputy Advocate General. For the respondents: Mr.Anuj Nag, Advocate, Rajiv Sharma,J. The respondents were prosecuted in Criminal Case No.114-II/99 under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. in the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kangra at Dharamshala and were acquitted on 5.1.2001; hence this appeal by the State against the judgment dated 5.1.2001. The facts in nutshell as gathered from the judgment of the trial court necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that accused Yashpal was married with complainant Rekha Devi (PW-1) in May, 1997. The accused in furtherance of their common intention started maltreating the complainant. The complainant moved an application on 13.2.1999 to the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat which was sent to the Smiti Member and the matter stood compromised. After sometime the accused persons again started maltreating the complainant. The formal FIR was registered by the police and the investigation was concluded. The challan was put up 1 Whether reporter of local papers is allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 in the court. The prosecution had examined as many as ten witnesses to support its case. The accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused were acquitted on 5.1.2001. Mr.Anil Kumar Jaswal learned Deputy Advocate General had strenuously argued that the prosecution has proved its case. Mr.Anuj Nag, learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment of the trial court dated 5.1.2001. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case carefully. PW-1 Rekha Devi is the complainant. She was married with accused Yashpal in the month of May, 1997. She stated that she made a written complaint to the Pradhan. However, no complaint was placed on record. PW-2 Smt. Anuradha Awasthi has also stated that complaint was made to her but no complaint was handed over to the police during the course of investigation. She had stated that PW-1 had come to her house to make a telephonic call to her parents. PW-1 in her statement has not stated that she went to the house of the PW-2 to make a phone call to her parents. PW-3 Joginder Singh has stated that they also approached the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat who directed them to go to Smiti Member but there is nothing in record to suggest that a written complaint was made by Rekha Devi or her brother to PW-2. The sister-in-law of the complainant Rajni Devi was declared hostile. PW-9 did not support the case of the prosecution. Three letters i.e. Ex.PW1/A, Ex.PW1/B and Ex.PW1/C were written by the complainant successively in the month of January, February and March, 1999, though the marriage of the complainant was solemnized in the month of May, 1997. PW-1 has stated that the accused persons started mal treating her after three months of the marriage but surprisingly the letters were written by her in the year 1999. 3 There is nothing on record to suggest that the accused persons have ever demanded dowry from the complainant. The trial court on correct appreciation of the evidence has acquitted the accused persons. This court will not interfere in the well reasoned judgment of the trial court. Hence this appeal fails and the same is dismissed. The bonds furnished by the accused are discharged. March 7, 2008 (g) ( Rajiv Sharma ), J