The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for consistent and substantiated evidence to prove allegations under Sections 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Hearned learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP Mr. Vikas Kishore on behalf of the State.

2. There is delay of 13 days in preferring the application seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 7th April, 2017 passed in C/1 Case No. 538 of 2010/T.R. No. 508 of 2017 by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur whereunder all the accused persons/opposite parties No. 2 to 5 have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Having considered the explanation furnished in the interlocutory application being IA No. 5484/2017 seeking condonation of delay, delay is conduct. IA stands allowed.

4. We have heared learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP on the merits of the petition seeking leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of acquittal. We have also gone through the impugned judgment. Complainant is the wife of accused Pankaj Das-opposite party No. 2 whose marriage was solemnized on 29th November, 2006 as per the Hindu rites and rituals. As per the allegation made in the complaint filed on 5th March, 2010 before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, her father had paid a sum of Rs. 1 lakh, 10 Tolas of gold ornaments, Almirah, Dressing Table, Palang, Clothes, utensils, furniture, bed sheet, bed cover, etc. worth Rs. 1,50,000/- as demanded by the accused persons. After she reached her in-laws house, she was subjected to torture alleging insufficient dowry. Accused No. 3 and 5 abused the father of the complainant but the protested and matter was settled and marriage was conducted. In the marriage party complainant found her husband accompanied with a lady named Laxmi and on being asked she was stated to be colleague from his office. Complainant ignored this incidence and started living a normal life. She got pregnant to which the accused persons 1, 2, 3 and 5 had objections as her husband was not earning enough. They asked her to bring Rs. 1 lakh in the nature of fixed deposit for the future prospects of the child. On failure to do so, she was kicked by the accused Nos. 1, 3 and 5 in her stomach. She was denied food and they also tried to press her neck in the night. She was assaulted in October 2007 by the accused husband. Accused No. 4 also used to abuse her as being an ugly woman. She gave birth to a baby girl on 5th January, 2008. Soon thereafter the accused persons became adamant to realise Rs. 1 lakh towards expenses to be borne to rear up the girl child. She was not allowed to stay in the house. They also tried to bum the complainant by leaving the cooking cylinder gas knob open, but she was lucky to escape. The accused made plants to kill the complainant and continued his illicit relationship with lady Laxmi. On 12th July, 2008 the accused persons assaulted the complainant, accused No.3 kicked her in her stomach, as a result she suffered injury. She was ousted from the house. She was treated a Mercy Hospital by Dr. Monika. The accused persons were not ready to take her back and threatened to burn her alive. In January 2010 the complainant made telephonic call to her husband for restitution of conjugal rights which he refused and said that he was happy with Laxmi and would marry her. On 31st January, 2010 these accused came to her house and asked to put her signature on the stamp paper so that the accused No. 1 husband would be able to perform marriage was Laxmi. When they failed to take her signature on the stamp paper, accused No. 1 and 3 became furious and abused her and accused No. 1 husband slapped her and threatened to murder her. Thereafter, she went to Gulmuri Police Station where she was directed to file a complaint case.

5. After solemn affirmation of the complainant and statement of injury witnesses, cognizance was taken under Sections 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused persons named in the complaint vide order dated 6th March, 2010. They were summoned to face