IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.9 of 2009 RAMAWTAR PRASAD Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAM CHANDRA PRASAD 3. PHULENA PRASAD 4. SAHDEO PRASAD 5. VIDHA PRASAD 6. SA NJAY KUMAR PATEL 7. DILIP KUMAR 8. MAHENDRA PRASAD PATEL 9. JAWAHIR PRASAD 10. PRADEEP PRASAD PATEL 11. RAM KUMAR PATEL 12. NAGENDRA PRASAD PATEL 13. MADAN PRASAD PATEL 14. ANGOOR PRASAD PATEL ------- 05.02.2009 Heard Ms. Jahan Ara in support of the application. The complainant-petitioner takes exception to the judgment and order of acquittal dated 7.11.2008, passed by the learned S.D.J.M. Bettiah, West Champran, whereby the accused (O.P.Nos.2 to 4 herein) were acquitted of the charge (s) under sections 147,148,323,379 and 427 IPC. In order to prove the charge(s), the prosecution got examined three witnesses, namely, P.W.1 Ramawatar Prasad (complainant), P.W.2 Lalan Prasad and P.W.3 Saty Narayan Prasad. The learned trial court has recorded that out of three witnesses, P.W.2 was not produced after charge for cross- examination and, as such, his evidence is of no consequence. It appears to this Court that the parties are litigating with regard to a piece of land bearing Khesra No.8741, measuring one - 2 - katha four dhurs on which a wooden kiosk is situated. The said land is being claimed by the prosecution(complainant). The defence adduced evidence and brought on record series of documents including Exts. A,B & C. The learned trial court has taken note of Ext.C which is a sale deed dated 6.12.1999 executed by one Tara Devi in favour of one of the co-accused, namely, Ram Chandra Prasad. In the background of these fact, the learned trial court has evaluated the evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 2 and has come to a conclusion that the prosecution has not been able to prove the charge(s) beyond shadow of all reasonable doubts. In the light of what I have observed above, the judgment and order of acquittal cannot be faulted. The trial court, in my view, has not committed any patent illegality justifying interference. The application is devoid of any merit which is accordingly dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )