T U SATHYAVATHY Vs. JAYACHANDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, who was examined as PW1 and the de facto complainant in C.C.425/1999 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Thrissur filed this revision challenging the order of acquittal. Learned Magistrate as per judgment dated 20/9/2003 acquitted first respondent for the offence under Section 341, 323 and 294(b) of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner and first respondent were heard.

(3.) LEARNED Magistrate on appreciation of the evidence acquitted the first respondent finding that there is no independent evidence with regard to the incident. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the view taken by the learned Magistrate is definitely a possible view which could be taken on appreciation of evidence. First respondent and his family alone is residing in the family house. Even if the other co-owners have a right of entry into that house, they cannot forcibly take Sudhakaran, the other brother to the said house compelling first respondent to permit him to reside in that house, especially when evidence show that at times Sudhakaran even turns violent. In such circumstances, even if first respondent might have obstructed the sisters taking Sudhakaran into that house. Based on the evidence of Pws.1 to 4 alone it cannot be said that their version is the true facts. On the facts and evidence. I find no reason whatsoever to interfere with the order of acquittal. Revision fails and is dismissed.