IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CR. REV. No.1187 of 2008
MAHENDRA BHAGAT, S/o Late Gena Lal Bhagat, R/o Batraha,
Ward No. 2, P.S.-Saharsa, District- Saharsa
...... Petitioner
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. Sunaina Devi, W/o Mahendra Bhagat.
3. Manjiya Devi, Widow of Late Maheshwari Yadav.
4. Vijendra Yadav
5. Surendra Yadav
6. Birendra Yadav @ Bechu Yadav
O.P.Nos. 4 to 6 all sons of Late Maheshwari Yadav.
.... Opposite Parties.
For the petitioner : Mr. Lala Schindra Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ashok Kr. Sinha, Advocate.
For the State :Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P.
-----------
3 01-07-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Petitioner is informant of the case which gave rise to S.T.
No. 90/03(T.R. NO. 74/2008) wherein charges under diverse
sections of the penal code including Sec. 366A/34 IPC were
framed and the accuseds were tried and acquitted of all the
charges.
It appears from the prosecution case that the wife of the
petitioner namely Sunaina Devi married with one Birendra Yadav.
The case was lodged by the informant with allegation that the
accused with the active connivance and support of other family
members had forcibly kidnapped and/or enticed away his wife and
daughter namely Santoshi Kumari.
At the trial, six prosecution witnesses were examined.
Learned trial court has found that they did not support the
2
prosecution case and accordingly, at the instance of the
prosecution, they were declared hostile. On the other hand,
defence adduced evidence of Santoshi Kumari as DW-1, who has
gone on record stating that the informant (father of this DW-1) had
ill treated them and driven out from the house.
This court finds no infirmity and/or patent illegality in the
consideration of the matter by the learned trial court.
There is no merit in this appeal.
It is accordingly, dismissed.
Sujit (Kishore K.Mandal,J)