JUDGMENT : S.C. Datta, J. - This Appeal is of the year 1987. The incident allegedly occured on 13.6.1984 and the learned Magistrate by his judgment and order dated 17th September, 1986, Acquitted the accused persons. Being aggrieved by the decision of the learned Magistrate, the complainant had preferred this appeal. After number of adjournments, the appeal was listed for hearing on 8th August, 1997 but at the time of hearing, none of the counsel of either party appeared. Even after the lunch interval when the matter was again called nobody came ready for hearing. Accordingly, the matter is taken up. 2. The appellant, namely, Dibakar Rout was the complainant before the learned Magistrate while the respondents were the accused persons. The accused persons faced their trial under Sections 147/323/448, I.P.C. for having committed rioting by use of forces of violence, forming an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of that assembly, trespassed into the house of the complainant and voluntarily caused hurt. 3. It appears that the complainant examined four persons including himself. He is P.W.2. It transpires during trial that there is a long standing enmity between the parties. The complainant has come with a story that on the date of occurrence, the accused persons have laid an Andhuli on the land of the complainant to catch fish and on protest the accused persons raided his house being armed with weapons of offence and committed house trespass and assaulted him. The complainant (P.W.2) has stated his case in the complaint petition before the learned Magistrate. It transpires from his evidence that none was there excepting his wife during the occurrence. Still we find P.W.1 corroborating him regarding the incident. The brother of the complainant who resides close by, has also not been examined. The learned Magistrate on consideration of the evidence adduced by the prosecution was led to hold that the witnesses spoke in a parrot like fashion and as such, he felt disinclined to repose confidence on them. The complainant has lodged the complaint petition before the Magistrate four days after the incident. It is said that the Courts were closed for Raja festival and as such, there is delay in lodging the complaint petition with the Magistrate. The learned Magistrate consulted the High Court calendar for the period and observed that the Courts of Bhadrak were open on 16.6.1984. It is said that the Courts were closed for Raja festival and as such, there is delay in lodging the complaint petition with the Magistrate. The learned Magistrate consulted the High Court calendar for the period and observed that the Courts of Bhadrak were open on 16.6.1984. According to the learned Magistrate, the prosecution had failed to offer any explanation as to why the complaint petition could not be filed on that day. It is also noticed that the complainant did not lodge the complaint with the local Police-station. The complainant has examined one Pharmacist (P.W.4) to prove the injury said to have been sustained by him during the occurrence. This pharmacist (P.W.4) is not the doctor. He had neither written the document nor treated the complainant. The doctor who is said to have treated the complainant has not been examined. According to the learned Magistrate, if these persons, viz., the wife and brother of the complainant who were allegedly present during the time of occurrence and the doctor who had allegedly treated the complainant, if examined, could have unfolded the truth of the case. It is strange to note that the complainant has withheld these witnesses. No independent witness comes forward to support the case of the prosecution Learned Magistrate quite rightly observed that the case of the complainant is not without suspicion. Accordingly, it appears, he had given the benefit of doubt and acquitted them of all the charges, have scrutinised the evidence in detail and I find that the learn Magistrate is perfectly right in acquitting the accused persons. 4. In the result, the appeal has no merit and as such it dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed