Case Facts:
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.29 of 2012 (9) dt.19-06-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.29 of 2012 ====================================================== Chalitar Paswan .... .... Appellant Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Ajay Mishra, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 9 19-06-2012 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. The present appeal has been filed under proviso of Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 05.09.2011 passed in SC/ST Case No.252 of 2004 corresponding to Trial No.134 of 2004 by Sri Jaggarnath Rai, the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, Sitamarhi by which respondent nos. 2 to 4 were acquitted from the charges under [STATUTE] and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and with his assistance have gone through the findings recorded by the learned trial court. As a matter of fact, Opposite Party Nos.2 to 4 were charged under Sections 323/120B and Section 3(1)(x) of the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.29 of 2012 (9) dt.19-06-2012 SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocities)Act. Opposite Party no.2 was further charged under [STATUTE] . The trial court after discussing the evidence on record has acquitted the accused persons of the charges. In course of trial the investigating officer of the case was not examined and thus it could not be proved that the occurrence took place within the public view. The trial court has also taken note of the fact of the witnesses who deposed on behalf of the prosecution gave contradictory statement to each other. Independent witnesses of the locality have not been examined though it has been alleged by the witnesses that nearly 100 persons of the locality assembled at the place of occurrence when the incident took place. The occurrence took place on 01.07.2002 but the written statement on the basis of which the FIR was instituted was given on 04.07.2002. Though it is alleged that the informant was badly assaulted as a result of which he became unconscious but neither any doctor has been examined on behalf of the prosecution nor any injury report in this regard has been brought on record. Considering all these aspects, the trial court came to a finding that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the accused persons. In my considered opinion, the finding recorded by the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.29 of 2012 (9) dt.19-06-2012 learned trial court cannot be held to be erroneous or that there was no perverse appreciation of evidence. In the result, I find no merit in this application. The appeal is dismissed. B.Kr./- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 420

Statute Text:
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Cheating and there by dishonestly inducing delivery of property, or the making, alteration or destruction of a valuable security. Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.