Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1399 of 2008 ====================================================== Ugra Narayan Mahto S/o Sri Ramdeo Mahto, R/o village- Brahman toil (Kharaka Telawa), P.S.- Nauhatta, District - Saharsa .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Raj Kumar Mahto S/o Dukha Mahto 3. Ram Khelawan Mahto S/o Sri Dukha Mahto 4. Dukha Mahto S/o Sri Baso Mahto (deleted vide order dated 21.7.2011) 5. Birendra Mahto @ Biren Mahto S/o Sri Basant Mahto 6. Chand Kumar Mahto @ Chandra Kumar Mahto S/o Sri Sukhadev Mahto. 7. Surendra Mahto @ Suren Mahto S/o Sri Parameshwar Mahto, all are R/o village- Brahman Toil (Kharaka Telawa), P.S. Nauhatta, District- Sahrasa .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anant Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advocate For the O.P. Nos. 2 to 7 : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate Mr. Prafull Chandra Thakur, Advocate For the State of Bihar : Mr. Matloob Rub, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 4 12-09-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 to 7. By the impugned judgment and order dated 3rd September, 2008 passed in Sessions Case No. 49 of 1995/ Trial No. 171 of 2008 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. 4, Saharsa, the accused-opposite parties Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1399 of 2008 (4) dt.12-09-2012 2/3 have been acquitted for the charges under [STATUTE] , by giving them benefits of doubts. The occurrence, in question, is said to have been taken placed on 10.5.1994 and since then more than 18 years have elapsed. Out of 11 P.Ws. examined on behalf of the prosecution, altogether 4 witnesses have been declared hostile. Admittedly, the investigating officer, who conducted the investigation with respect to the crime, in question, has not been examined during the course of trial. From the evidence of P.W. 6, Dr. Kishore Kumar Madhup, who conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased, the prosecution case stands contradicted. Learned trial court has scrutinised the evidence of remaining witnesses minutely and, thereafter, has come to a finding that the manner of occurrence and place of occurrence has not been conclusively proved by the prosecution. Consequently, by giving the benefits of doubts to the accused-opposite parties, the learned trial court has recorded the impugned judgment of acquittal. In the given facts of the case, this Court is not inclined to exercise its revisional jurisdiction for setting aside Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1399 of 2008 (4) dt.12-09-2012 3/3 and reversing the impugned judgment of acquittal. In the result, the application fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. RPS/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 147

Statute Text:
Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. Rioting. Whoever is guilty of rioting, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.