Appellant-State has filed the appeal under section 378 of the CrPC against the judgment and order dated 30.10.1993 in Criminal Case No. 21/85 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Biaora, Rajgarh, of acquitting the respondent-accused from the offence punishable under section 498A, 324/34, 323/34 of the IPC and for the offence punishable under section 4 of Prevention of Dowry Act.

The admitted facts of the case are that the marriage of complainant Seema (PW 2) was performed with accused Narendra on 6.5.1983 and accused Shyamlal and Sushila are the parents of accused Narendra. It is common ground that on the day of alleged incident 11.11.1984 the complainant Seema (PW 2) was staying in her matrimonial house with the accused person.

The prosecution case is that on 11.11.1984 Ramcharan (PW 1) has lodged the written report in the Police Station, Biaora that he is a teacher in the school and the marriage of his daughter was solemnized about 10 months back with accused Narendra and after the marriage, accused Narendra and his parents are harassing his daughter to fulfill their demand of Rs. 20,000/- in the dowry and that on 9.11.1984 his wife Shanta Sharma (PW 3) went to the house of the accused to see her daughter and saw that there were several injuries on the body of Seema (PW 2) and that her daughter complained that she should be taken away from the house otherwise the accused persons will kill her for the dowry. The complainant Seema (PW 2) was sent for the medical examination to Civil Hospital, Biaora where Dr. R.K. Choure (PW 4) conducted her medical examination and found 5 injuries on her body and which were caused by hard and blunt object within the period of 2 days and the doctor advised the X-ray of the chest, confirmed the fracture. After the investigation, the police has filed the charge sheet against the accused persons on 8.1.1985 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Biaora, for the offence punishable under section 498A, 323, 324/34 of the IPC.

The accused persons have abjured the guilt and they have denied the statement of the prosecution witnesses under section 313 of the CrPC. The accused persons have pleaded false implication and they have not led any evidence in their defence.

The prosecution has examined Ramcharan (PW 1), complainant Seema (PW 2), Shanta Sharma (PW 3) and Dr. R.K. Choure (PW 4). The learned trial Court has held that there is a variation in the statement of the complainant in her medical report and the accused persons were acquitted by the learned trial Court.

The appellant has assailed the finding of the learned trial Court on the ground that the learned trial Court has erred in rejecting the statement of the complainant Seema (PW 2) and her parents and the appellant should be convicted for the offence punishable under section 498A of the IPC as the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused persons.

Seema (PW 2) has stated that when she went third time to her matrimonial house, the accused persons asked her to bring the amount of Rs. 20,000/- from her parents and they also threatened her to kill her if their demand is not fulfilled. Seema (PW 2) has further stated that her mother-in-law assaulted her with lathi and caused the injury on her head and other parts of the body. She has further stated that her husband caused her the bum injury. Seema (PW 2) has stated that she wrote the letter to her mother and when her mother came to see her in the house, the accused persons have ousted her mother from the house. It is further stated by Seema (PW 2) that the police had sent her for medical examination and she was examined for her injury in the Civil Hospital. Seema (PW 2) is teaching in the school and the accused persons have not disclosed any reason of her giving the false statement against them. In the long and searching cross-examination of Seema (PW 2) the facts to discredit her statement were not brought out and there i