Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.875 of 2012 ====================================================== Bipin Giri, son of Bhagwan Giri, resident of village-Kumhiya Khurd, P.O. & P.S.-Ramnagar, District-West Champaran, Bihar. .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Sri Krishna Giri, son of Ram Prasad Giri, resident of village-Kumhiya Khurd, P.O. & P.S.-Ramnagar, District-West Champaran, Bihar. .... .... Opposite Parties. Appearance: For the Appellant : Mr. V.R. Bharti, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Z. Hoda, A.P.P. ===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 05-11-2012 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The present appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed on behalf of the victim of the case against the judgment of acquittal dated 18.8.2012 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bagaha at West Champaran in Sessions Trial No. 148 of 2004 arising out of Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 222 of 1993 by which, the opposite party no. 2 has been acquitted of the charge levelled against him under [STATUTE] . Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.875 of 2012 (2) dt.05-11-2012 2 / 3 2 The court below has recorded in its judgment that though the alleged dacoity is said to have taken place in the night intervening between 3rd & 4th of October, 1993 but, the information was given to police belatedly on 9.10.1993. There is no explanation for the delay in institution of the F.I.R. The witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution have admitted that the matter was neither reported to the Dafadar nor to the Choukidar nor to the Mukhiya or Sarpanch. Opposite Party No. 2 is a co-villager and is on litigating terms with the informant of the case. No independent person has come forward to support the prosecution case. Apart from the informant, the three witnesses, who have deposed on behalf of the prosecution in course of trial, are employees of the informant. They have made contradictory statement to each other. The court below has recorded in its judgment that the possibility of false implication of the accused in the facts and circumstances of the case cannot be ruled out. Having heard the parties and perused the judgment, I find that the trial court has recorded clear, cogent and convincing reasons in recording acquittal of opposite party no. 2. The findings of the trial court are neither perverse nor erroneous. In case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.875 of 2012 (2) dt.05-11-2012 3 / 3 3 available to him under the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of innocence is further re- inforced, re-affirmed and strengthened by the trial court. In that view of the matter, I find no merit in the present appeal. It is dismissed, accordingly. Sanjeet/- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 395

Statute Text:
Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. Dacoity. Whoever commits dacoity shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.