LAWS(JHAR)-2017-7-78

SOBHA RANI DAS Vs. SHIV CHARAN RAVIDAS

Decided On July 05, 2017
Sobha Rani Das Appellant
V/S
Shiv Charan Ravidas Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order of acquittal passed in C.P. Case No.969/2007 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad dated 23rd July 2014. The complainant alleged that after the death of her husband Late Sarat Chandra Ravidas in a road accident on 8th March 2007, her step sons Shiv Charan Ravidas, Shambhu Charan Ravidas and one Sadhna Das with whom Shiv Charan Ravidas solemnized marriage within 10- 12 days of his father's death, threatened her to leave the house. All the accused persons live in another house separately from the complainant's house. On 20th March 2007 at 11 A.M. all accused persons came in her house armed with iron rod, lathi and assaulted her by which she sustained severe injuries on her body. Again on 12th June, 2007 all accused came to her house to extort properties, land documents, service documents, LIC Certificates, etc. and assaulted her. The complainant alleged that after her marriage with Sarat Chandra Ravidas, ornaments such as a gold chain, two ear rings and two finger rings of a value of Rs. 20,000.00 were handed over to Shiv Charan Ravidas to be kept in safe custody. On being demanded, the accused persons refused to return the same. All the accused persons assaulted the complainant again on the very same day at 6:30 P.M. and put away all her belongings like Sarees, dress materials and steel utensils worth Rs. 20,000.00. Though local Police was informed, but no action was taken nor any case was instituted on the basis of her complaint. The instant case was registered on 18th June 2007 under Sections 323, 324, 379, 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) After enquiry the learned court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad found prima-facie case under Sections 323/406 of the I.P.C. Processes were issued thereafter. Since accused persons pleaded not guilty, the trial commenced. Four witnesses were examined on behalf of the complainant and four also on behalf of the accused as defence witnesses.