D.P.SINGH, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the complainant Bhakti Bala Dasi against the acquittal of the respondents made accused by her in Complaint Case No. 15/91.
(2.) BRIEF facts leading to this appeal are that the appellant has lodged a complaint case against her husband Baldeo Pandit and 18 others alleging therein that she has been neglected and left by respondent Baldeo Pandit for last six years, as she was issueless. She further asserted that she was living with her father for last one year, when she came to know that her husband has married with one Champa Devi with active support of other respondents. This complaint was lodged before ACJM Jamtara on 15.1.1991. According to her version, the marriage has taken place in the night of 14/15th December, 1990. The learned ACJM, took cognizance in the case for the offence under Sections 494 and 109, IPC against the respondents. However, after trial the learned trial Court found and held that the complainant has failed to prove the charges and acquitted the respondents by order dated 5.3.1994. The present appeal has been preferred on the ground that the learned trial Court did not consider the evidence available on record and wrongly concluded that the complainant -appellant has failed to prove charges. It is also asserted before me by Mr. Sunil Kumar Mahto, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that the order of acquittal is arbitrary and passed without appreciating the facts on record. According to the learned Counsel, as the marriage was proved to have taken place during the lifetime of first wife, the trial Court should have found and held..., that the respondents guilty for the offence under Sec. 494, IPC.
(3.) I have anxiously considered the submissions and gone through the materials on record along with the impugned judgment dated 5.3.1994. The complainant, as PW 4, has admitted during cross - examination that she was not mentally well for last 4 -5 years. She further admitted that she has lodged a compliant case for maintenance against her husband. She further admitted that she did not know any of the accused persons of village Barabewa though she has arrayed as many as 18 persons as accused along with her husband in this case. Her father Nand Lal Pandit has not been examined before the trial Court. Other witnesses examined as PWs 1, 2, 3 and 6, though alleged that the respondent Baldeo Pandit has thrown away the complainant from his house and thereafter married with Champa Devi, none of them asserted that they have seen the marriage taking place except Kashi Pandit. This witness has admitted during cross -examination that his son - in -law was Bhim Pandit.;