JUDGMENT : Heard on admission. Perused the record. This appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the appellant/complainant assailing the judgment dated 18/7/2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chachouda, District Guna, whereby respondents No.2 to 6 have been acquitted from the offences punishable under Sections 452, 427 and 435 of IPC. 2. As per prosecution case, on the dispute that son of complainant, namely, Sumer Singh, solemnized marriage with the daughter of accused-Chain Singh Gurjar against his will, on 19/5/2011 at about 2:30 AM in the night the accused persons entered into the house of the complainant, damaged the household articles and also set fire at the cow-dung (cakes) placed nearby the house. 3. The matter was reported to the police station concerned and Investigation Officer conducted the investigation and submitted charge-sheet before the trial court. During trial, learned Trial Judge recorded the evidence of the parties, framed the issues and after hearing learned counsel for both the parties, acquitted the accused persons from offences, as mentioned hereinabove. 4. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant/complainant is that the judgment of acquittal passed by learned Trial Court is wrong, illegal and against the law, hence, the same deserves to be set aside and the respondents No.2 to 6 deserve to be convicted and sentenced for the offences alleged against them. 5. On perusal of the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by learned Trial Court, it is found that the accused/respondent No.2 to 6 have been acquitted on the basis that there is material contradiction and omission in the statements of prosecution witnesses and further there was no recovery from the accused persons and even no residue of burnt articles was found. On going through the evidence of material prosecution witnesses, Sumer Singh Gurjar (PW-2), complainant-Ramsingh (PW-2) and Leelabai (PW-3), it is found that they all have stated contradictory statements, even the time of commission of alleged incident, as stated by them, is different, as in the report lodged at the police station the time of incident was stated as 2:30 AM in the night while in the statements, the same has been stated as at about 11:00 AM, which makes the entire prosecution story doubtful and so there appears no illegality or irregularity in the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court. Accordingly, this appeal being sans merit, the judgment of acquittal passed by learned trial court warrants no interference. Resultantly, the appeal is hereby dismissed in limine.