Case Facts:
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.495 of 2012 (2) dt.19-06-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (DB) No.495 of 2012 ====================================================== Yogendra Yadav, Son of Late Bhusho Yadav, Resident of Village - Pama Tokadih, P.S. Sour Bazar, District-Saharsa. .... .... Appellant. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Bhola Kamti, Son of Late Chhedi Kamti 3. Dhirendra Kamti, Son of Satya Narain Kamti 4. Satya Narain Kamti, Son of Late Chhedi Kamti All are resident of village – Pama Dihtola, P.O. Pama Via Dhabauli, P.S. – Sour Bazar, District – Saharsa. .... .... Respondents. ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Shiva Shankar Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. D.K. Sinha, APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA) 2 19-06-2012 Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and for the State. The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 26th of April, 2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. III, Saharsa in Sessions Trial No. 220 of 2001 relating to G.R. Case No. 319 of 1998 arising out of Saurbazar P.S. Case No. 55 of 1998, whereby the opposite parties/accused Bhola Kamti, Dhirendra Kamti and Satya Narain Kamti were acquitted from the charges under [STATUTE] and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.495 of 2012 (2) dt.19-06-2012 The trial court after considering the facts and circumstances and materials brought on record came to the conclusion that witnesses were not reliable/believable and they have contradicted themselves. It was also observed that material witnesses Nago Kamti, Sudama Devi, Rambha Devi, injured Mira Kumari, doctor and the I.O. were not examined by the prosecution. The prosecution witnesses were the persons who could have unfolded the truth, therefore, their non-examination have prejudice the case. Therefore, the court has rightly observed that in absence of the material witnesses, the prosecution case could not be believed. We find no illegality and impropriety in the judgment. Thus, it requires no interference. In the result, this case is without merit and it is accordingly dismissed. KKSINHA/- (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.) (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 323

Statute Text:
Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Voluntarily causing hurt. Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.