Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.347 of 2009 ====================================================== Mahanth Sharma S/o Bhimal Mahto R/o village- Mathauli , P.S.- Bairia, District- West Champaran (Complainant) .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Jata Mahto S/o Sri Rajeshwar Mahto R/o village- Mathauli, P.S. Bairia, District- West Champaran ( Accused) .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocate For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Binay Kant Manti Tripathi, Advocate For the State of Bihar : Mr. Amitesh Kumar A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 05-10-2012 Heard. The accused-opposite party no. 2 was convicted for charge under [STATUTE] by the judgment and order dated 8th June, 2007 passed in Complaint Case No. 1702 C of 2004/ T.R. No. 515 of 2007 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bettiah, West Champaran and, accordingly, he was sentenced to undergo R.I. for two months for charge under [STATUTE] . and R.I. for two years for charge under [STATUTE] ., and besides that a fine of Rs. 5000/- was also imposed against the opposite party no. 2 . The accused-opposite party no.2, being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence, preferred Criminal Appeal No. 139 of 2007, which has been allowed by the impugned judgment and order dated 28th Patna High Court CR. REV. No.347 of 2009 (3) dt.05-10-2012 2/3 November, 2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-4, West Champaran, Bettiah, and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial court has been set aside and the accused-opposite party no. 2 has been acquitted for all the charges. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the validity and correctness of the impugned appellate judgment primarily on the ground that the evidence of the prosecution available on record has not been properly appreciated by the learned lower appellate court, and thereby the learned lower appellate court has come to a wrong conclusion and has wrongly recorded the impugned judgment of acquittal. However, he has not pointed out any legal infirmity or procedural irregularity committed by the learned lower appellate court for passing the impugned appellate judgment of acquittal. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 have opposed the prayer and have supported the impugned appellate judgment passed by the learned lower appellate court, acquitting the accused-opposite party no.2 for both the charges. It is well settled that appeal is a continuation of the trial. Patna High Court CR. REV. No.347 of 2009 (3) dt.05-10-2012 3/3 The learned lower appellate court was fully justified in reconsidering and reappraising of the entire materials available on record for coming to a different conclusion than that of the learned trial court. On perusal of the impugned judgment passed by the learned lower appellate court, this Court finds that the learned lower appellate court has meticulously scrutinised and considered the entire materials available on record and, thereafter, has recorded a judgment of acquittal in favour of the accused-opposite party no. 2. In the given facts of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case warranting exercise of its revisional jurisdiction for setting aside and reversing the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned lower appellate court. No case for interference is made out. The application stands dismissed. RPS/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 427

Statute Text:
Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code. Mischief, and thereby causing damage to the amount of 50 rupees or upwards. Whoever commits mischief and thereby causes loss or damage to the amount of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.