Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1160 of 2008 ====================================================== Manoj Kumar Sah, son of late Shankar Sao, resident of Village Kasmir, P.S. Khaira, District Jamui .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Triveni Yadav 3. Bali Yadav 4. Pyare Yadav, 2 to 4 are sons of Biranchi Yadav, all residents of Village Kasmir, P.S. Khaira, District Jamui .... .... Opposite party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramesh Singh, Advocate Mr. Umesh Prasad, Advocate For the Opp. party Nos. 2 to 4 : Mr. Shakeel Ahmad Khan, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, Advocate For the State of Bihar : Mr. Md. Mustaque Alam, Addl.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 4 30-07-2012 The petitioner, the victim under the criminal case, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 30.7.2008 passed in Sessions Trial No. 292 of 2006 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-IV, Jamui, acquitting the accused opposite party nos. 2 to 4 for charges under [STATUTE] , has preferred the present revision application under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( for short ‘Cr.P.C.’), questioning the correctness, legality and propriety of the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. In between the night of 2nd/3rd July, 1999, in mid Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1160 of 2008 (4) dt.30-07-2012 2 / 7 2 night between 0.30 a.m. to 1 a.m., 8 to 10 miscreants are said to have entered in the house of the informant Kamali Devi ( P.W. 9). Her son Manoj Kumar Sah ( P.W. 8),the present petitioner, is said to have been abducted by them in order to murder him. With respect to the aforesaid occurrence an F.I.R. was lodged on 3.7.1999. It is admitted case of the prosecution that the victim Manoj Kumar Sah (P.W. 8) returned back to his home on 24.8.1999 safely, after remaining in the captivity of the accused persons for more than one and half months and during the aforesaid period of captivity no harm was caused to him. In the F.I.R. the accused opposite party nos. 2 to 4 were arrayed in the category of accused. On close of investigation charge sheet was submitted and, accordingly, cognizance was taken against the accused opposite parties and they were put on trial for charges, as indicated above. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has argued the matter at great length and has submitted that in support of the prosecution case, altogether 11 P.Ws. were examined. Some documents produced by the prosecution were also marked as exhibits. However, learned counsel has fairly conceded that the Investigating Officer of the case was not examined during the course of trial. According to the learned counsel, the learned trial court has committed an error of law by giving benefits of doubts to the accused persons, and on the basis of materials produced by the prosecution, the accused opposite parties should have been convicted for the charges framed against them. It was lastly contended that even if charge under [STATUTE] was not established, then in that case, the accused opposite party nos. 2 to 4 should have been convicted for charge under Section 364A of the Indian penal Code Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1160 of 2008 (4) dt.30-07-2012 3 / 7 3 by amending the charge. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in the matter of Sitaram Singh and Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar, [2011(1) PLJR 667] (Paragraph. 15). In the present case, by an order dated 12.5.2010 passed by a Bench of this Court, notice was issued to the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 and in response to that accused persons have entered appearance through their counsel and have resisted the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner in the preset case. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the accused opposite party nos. 2 to 4 has strongly contested the case and has supported the impugned judgment of acquittal. It was contended on behalf of the accused opposite parties that large numbers of civil and criminal litigations are pending between the parties and both sides are the residents of same village and they are practically neighbours. It was also contended that though occurrence is said to have taken place in the mid night, but there was no means of identification, yet the accused opposite party nos. 2 to 4 were named in the F.I.R. and were falsely implicated in the aforesaid criminal case. According to the learned Senior counsel, though in the F.I.R. means of identification was not disclosed, yet during the course of trial means of identification was introduced and a claim was made that a lantern was burning, but the material exhibit i.e. the lantern was not produced during the course of trial. It was next contended that in the given facts of the case and in view of the fact that alleged victim ( P.W.8) returned safely after more than one and half months, examination of Investigation Officer was very essential. According to him, non-examination of the Investigating Officer in the given facts was fatal for the prosecution case and the learned trial court has rightly doubted the Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1160 of 2008 (4) dt.30-07-2012 4 / 7 4 correctness and veracity of the prosecution case and has justifiably given the benefits of doubts to the accused opposite party nos. 2 to 4 and has rightly acquitted them for all the charges. It was lastly contended that the State of Bihar has not chosen to challenge the impugned judgment of acquittal and no Government appeal has been filed. The present criminal revision application has been filed by a private individual. In the submission of the learned Senior counsel, the scope for interference against a judgment of acquittal, while exercising revisional powers i

Applicable IPC Section: 302

Statute Text:
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Murder. Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.