Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.134 of 2009 ====================================================== Radha Krishna Singh Yadav, son of late Jaynath Yadav, resident of village Nawadaben, Police Station Udwantnagar, District Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Jai Kishore Singh, son of late Ram Dutta Singh 3. Triloki Singh, son of late Ram Jiwan Singh 4. Ranjan Kumar, son of Triloki Singh, all residents of village Nawadaben, Police Station Udwant Nagar, District Bhojpur .... .... Opposite party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rahul Nath, Advocate Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the State of Bihar : Mr. Ramchandra Singh, Addl.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 25-09-2012 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State of Bihar. By the impugned appellate judgment dated 25th October, 2008 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 16 of 2007 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast track Court-II, Ara, Bhojpur, the aforesaid appeal preferred by the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 has been allowed and their conviction under [STATUTE] recorded by the learned trial court has been set aside and, thereby, by giving benefits of doubts, the Patna High Court CR. REV. No.134 of 2009 (3) dt.25-09-2012 2 / 2 2 accused opposite party nos. 2 to 4 have been acquitted for the aforesaid charges. Learned lower appellate court has reappraised the materials/evidence available on record and has come to a finding that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable shadow of doubts. The learned lower appellate court was well within its jurisdiction to reappraise the prosecution evidence and come to a different conclusion than that of the learned trial court. The occurrence in question is said to have taken place in the year 1993 and more than 19 years have elapsed since the date of occurrence. In the given facts of this case, this Court is not inclined to exercise its revisisonal jurisdiction for setting aside and reversing the impugned judgment of acquittal recorded by the learned lower appellate court. Consequently, the application fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. Kanth/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 341

Statute Text:
Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code. Wrongfully restraining any person. Whoever wrongfully restrains any person shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.