IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CR. REV. No.1309 of 2008
RAM BRIKSH SINGH SON OF LATE GARVADEO SINGH, R/O-
SADIKPUR, P.S.- BARH, DISTRICT- PATNA.
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. SURESH KAHAR, SON OF LATE DINA NATH KAHAR.
3. RAM DAHIN KAHAR SON OF BAIKUNTH KAHAR
4. GANESH KAHAR SON OF DINA NATH KAHAR.
5. DULAR KAHAR, SON OF RAM UGRAH KAHAR.
ALL R/O BAHADARPUR, P.S.- CHANDI, DISTRICT- NALANDA.
-----------
4 27.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Petitioner is the informant (P.W. 9). He assails the
judgment and order dated 11.6.2008 passed in Sessions Trial
No. 284 of 1996 by learned Addl. District Judge, Hilsa, Nalanda
whereby the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 have been acquitted of the
charges punishable under Sections 395 and 412 of Indian Penal
Code.
Learned trial court in paragraph 12 has appraised the
evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution and in paragraph
13 has indicated the reasons for not placing reliance on the
witnesses produced on behalf of the prosecution. The aforesaid
consideration has been made in the backdrop of the fact that
consistently all the P.Ws have deposed that the accused were all
residents of their village and they allegedly committed the
occurrence without taking slightest effort to conceal their identity.
The reasons assigned by learned trial court cannot be said to be
patently illegal and/or wholly perverse.
2
There is no merit in this application. It is accordingly
dismissed.
( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )
pkj