Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.817 of 2009 ====================================================== Surendra Patel S/O Ram Chandra Ray, resident of Village- Chand Kewari, P.O. Saharsa, P.S. Paru (Dewariya O.P.), District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Visheshwar Prasad S/O Late Baijnath Prasad 3. Dilip Kumar 4. Ajit Kumar both sons of Sri Visheshwar Prasad 5. Nagmani Devi W/O Sri Visheshwar Prasad All resident of village- Dumari Parmanandpur, P.S.- Paru, District Muzaffarpur. .... .... Opp. Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uma Shankar Singh, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 17-10-2012 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State. By the impugned judgment and order dated 26th February 2009 passed in G.R. No. 1205 of 2003/ Tr. No. 638 of 2009 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Muzaffarpur West, accused opposite party no. 2 to 5 have been acquitted of the charges under [STATUTE] . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case investigation was not properly conducted by the Investigating Officer. Though case was lodged for offences under [STATUTE] , but on close of investigation charge sheet was submitted for offence under [STATUTE] only. However, on the basis of materials available on record, the learned Judicial Magistrate, framed charge against the accused persons for offences under Sections 326 and Patna High Court CR. REV. No.817 of 2009 (3) dt.17-10-20 2/ 3 341/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly conceded that in the present case, neither the doctor was examined nor the Investigating Officer was examined in support of the prosecution case. Despite opportunity given only two witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. He contends that since the trial was not properly conducted, therefore, the matter is required to be remitted back after setting aside the impugned judgment of acquittal. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer and has supported the impugned judgment. He submits that occurrence in question is said to have taken place on 17.06.2003 and the petitioner filed a petition of complaint after undue and unexplained delay of about one and half months on 29.07.2003. After having heard the parties and on examination of the materials available on record, this Court finds that not only there has been undue delay of almost one and half months in filing the complaint case by the petitioner, which ultimately was referred to the police for investigation in exercise of powers under Section 156(3) Cr. P. C. whereafter the prosecution case was found not fully correct, but despite full opportunity given to the prosecution and the matter having remained pending for almost three years after framing of charge, the prosecution could produce only two witnesses. Admittedly, Investigating Officer and the Doctor have not been examined in support of the prosecution case. In the aforesaid factual background, the learned trial court has rightly recorded a judgment of acquittal in favour of the accused opposite party no. 2 to 5. No case for interference is made out. Patna High Court CR. REV. No.817 of 2009 (3) dt.17-10-20 3/ 3 The application stands dismissed. BTiwary/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 307

Statute Text:
Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Attempt to murder. Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by Life Convicts: When any person offending under this section is under sentence of imprisonment for life, he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.