JUDGMENT R.B. MISRA, J. 1. THE present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after the leave to appeal has been granted under Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in reference to judgment dated 28.4.2006 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class Court No.1, Amb, District Un in complaint No. 92-1 of 2003/23-II/2003, thereby acquitting the respondents/accused for the offence under Sections 498-A, 403, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC 2. ACCORDING to the prosecution, complaint was filed on 31.12.2002, alleging that Bishan Dass, brother in law of the complainant, after the death of her husband late Jai Dev, has started harassing the complainant with an intention to grab the property of the complainant and thereafter ousted her from in laws house. The complainant had to leave Whether the reporters of the local papers maybe allowed to see the judgment? the domestic articles, provided to her in marriage ceremony, in In-laws house. On 25.12.2002 when complainant went to accused to get the articles back, accused gave fist and leg blows to her. On investigation, accused was charged for the aforesaid offences. The prosecution in order to prove its case, examined as many as three prosecution witnesses, whereas Smt. Biasan Devi has been examined as defence witness. On analysis of the prosecution witnesses and materials on record, no proof is available regarding offering of dowry and articles from the parents of the complainant. Complainant did not bother to make any complaint when she was ousted from the house of her in laws. She has never bothered to inform to the Gram Panchayat or Pradhan or to any person of the locality or to the police that she has been ousted from the house of her in laws and that all belongings/articles and domestic materials have been kept by the accused. No information of any kind including FIR was lodged regarding giving of any beating to the complainant. Even breaking of locks was also not informed to any one. The witnesses are interested witnesses and out of three witnesses, including the complainant, one prosecution witness namely Kesar Singh, CW-3 was not residing with the complainant at the relevant time. Even Biasan Devi, the mother in law of the complainant, had not supported the prosecution case. Even breaking of locks was also not informed to any one. The witnesses are interested witnesses and out of three witnesses, including the complainant, one prosecution witness namely Kesar Singh, CW-3 was not residing with the complainant at the relevant time. Even Biasan Devi, the mother in law of the complainant, had not supported the prosecution case. Record has also revealed that after the death of Jai Dev, the husband of the complainant, relation of Ram Pal and Bishan Dass became strained and they were not in good terms at all. No medical evidence is available regarding giving beating, torturing and creating injury including danger to life and health of the complainant. 3. IN my considered view, in these circumstances, learned Judicial Magistrate has rightly arrived at the finding that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case against the accused persons beyond shadow of reasonable doubt and accordingly has rightly acquitted the accused in respect of the aforesaid offences. Therefore, in my considered view, I do not find any scope for interference in the impugned judgment of the learned Addl. Judicial Magistrate, The criminal appeal, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed. 4. THE bail bonds, furnished by the accused/ respondents, are discharged.