JUDGMENT

Pradip Mohanty, J.—This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 18.8.2005 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Banpur dismissing the complaint (I.C.C. No.103 of 2005) under Section 203 Cr.P.C., with a finding that there is no sufficient ground to proceed against opposite parties 2 and 3.

2. Case of the petitioner is that she filed a complaint under Sections 294/323/506/34 IPC and Section 3 of the S.C. & S.T. (P.A.) Act before the J.M.F.C., Banpur, which was registered as I.C.C. No.103 of 2005. After recording of her initial statement, two witnesses were examined by her under Section 202 Cr. P.C. But on 18.8.2005, learned J.M.F.C. dismissed the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. on the ground that essential ingredients of the aforesaid offences are not established; that there are material discrepancies in the statement of the complainant and that of the witnesses; and that although one Ratnakar Sethi was named as an occurrence witness, he was not examined by the complainant.

3. Mr. Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that essential ingredients of all the above offences are well established by the witnesses including the complainant against the pr