KULAMANI BAG Vs. GANESHRAM SUHULA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against the order of acquittal in I.C.C. No. 88 of 1985 (Trial No. 35 of 1986) of the Court of J.M.F.C. Sambalpur. Complainant is the appellant and the accused is the respondent.

(2.) Respondent faced the trial for the offence punishable under Sections 497, I.P.C. The accusation against the respondent is that he enticed away P.W. 3 who is the wife of P.W. 1 (the complainant) and that on his inducement she committed theft of a cash of Rs. 1,0001- and some brass utensils from the house and during the period of elopment he made sexual inter course with P.W. No. 3 and thereby committed the offence of adultery punishable under Section 497 I.P.C It is the further case of the complainant that matter was reported to the Police and when no action was taken by the Police he filed a complaint vide I.C.C. Case No. 76 of 1983 against P.W. No. 3 and the present accused for the offence under Section 376 I.P.C. In that case the respondent was discharged and thereafter the complaint case was filed by the complainant against the respondent which was registered as I.C.C. No. 88 of 1983. In that case (I.C.C. No. 76 of 1983) charge for the offence under Section 379, I.P.C. was framed against P.W. 3 and she was found guilty and convicted for that offence but she was released on probation after due admonition in accordance with the provision in Section 3 of Probation of Offenders Act.

(3.) Complainants complaint against accused/respondent is for enticing away his wife with cash and utensils and cohabiting with her knowing fully well that she is the legally married wife of the complainant. In that respect, the complainant though examined five witnesses, but direct evidence in that respect is that of P.W. No. 3 alone. Learned counsel for the appellant reads the entire evidence of all the witnesses and after going through such evidence and the findings recorded by the trial court, this Court finds no illegality in the impugned judgment of acquittal inasmuch as for the reasons stated in the impugned judgment the evidence of P.W. 3 was not at all found reliable and creditworthy. After careful perusal of such evidence, this Court agrees with the view expressed relating to nonreliableness of the evidence of P.W. No. 3. In the absence of that evidence the other evidence on record are not sufficient to prove the charge under Section 497, I.P.C. Under such circumstance, this Court does not interfere with the order of acquittal. The appeal stands dismissed accordingly. Appeal dismissed.