IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.934 of 2007 Vivek Kumar Singh son of Raghunath Singh R/o vill. Harail, P.S. Mohiuddin Nagar, Dist. Samastipur. ----Petitioner. Versus 1.The State of Bihar 2. Devnath Singh S/o Late Kewal Singh 3. Umesh Prasad Singh @ Umesh Kumar Singh 4. Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Raju 5. Chandan Kumar Singh @ Chhotu (O.P. nos. 3 to 5 sons of Devnath Singh, All r/o vill. Harail, P.S. Mohiuddin Nagar, Dist. Samastipur. ----Opp.Parties. For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudama Singh, Advocate. For the O.P’s : Mr. Abhay Shankar Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ----------- 06. 07.07.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, State and opposite parties. Petitioner is the informant of the case which germinated Sessions Trial no. 984 of 2004, of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. II, Samastipur. He is aggrieved by the judgment dated 03.05.2007, rendered in the aforesaid trial whereby while convicting the accuseds ( opposite party nos. 2 to 5) under Sections 324, 325 and 341 of the Penal Code, it was found and held that charge punishable under Section 307 of the Penal Code is not substantiated from the evidence available on record. Background of the case has been dealt with in paragraph no.10 of the judgment. Learned trial Court while dealing with the charge punishable under Section 307 of the Penal Code has observed as under:- “11. So far the offence u/s 307 I.P.C. is concerned there is no clinching evidence to prove 2 that the accused persons had assaulted the informant and his father and caused such injury likely to cause their death. Both the father and son has stated that they were given farsa blow but the nature of injuries are simple. From the evidence it also appears that both the informant and his father were completely at the mercy of the accused persons and the accused persons were armed with farsa and lathi but no dangerous wound on any vital part of the body was given. Therefore it can be safely inferred that the prosecution side has not been able to prove its case u/s 307 I.P.C. The informant and other witnesses have stated that at the time of occurrence about 50 villagers had arrived there who saved them from the assault of the accused persons but not a single villagers has come forward to support the informant’s case. It also creates doubt in the prosecution story u/s 307 I.P.C.” While assailing the order of acquittal under Section 307 of the Penal Code it is submitted that father of the informant received five injuries, one of which was found on the skull and as such learned trial Court has erred in acquitting the opposite parties of the charge under Section 307 of the Penal Code Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties has, however, supported the finding of the learned trial Court whereby they were acquitted of the charge punishable under Section 307 of the Penal Code. It is contended that Court has to take into consideration various aspects of the matter while coming to the conclusion as to whether there was any intention to kill the victim/injureds. Having considered the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and after going through the materials available on record, this Court is of the view that the reasons assigned by the learned trial Court for acquitting the accuseds 3 (opposite party nos. 2 to 5) of the charge punishable under Section 307 of the Penal Code cannot be said to be perverse and/or perfunctory. There is no merit in this application. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)