IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA G. APP. (SJ) No.21 of 1994 State of Bihar Versus 1. Ram Niwas Mandal, son of Late Kuldip Mandal 2. Ram Mandal, son of Late Kishori Mandal. 3. Dhukha Choudhary, son of Late Bhantu Choudhary. 4. Ganesh Sah, son of Late Punit Sah 5. Ram Swarath Mandal, son of Suta Ram Mandal. 6. Dr. Chandra Bhushan Pd. son of Alku Sah. 7. Raj Kumar Mandal son of Galia Mandal 8. Manoj Mandal son of Late Kishori Mandal. All of village-Murliachak, Post+Dist. Sitamarhi. ----------- For the Appellant: Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta,A.P.P. 7. 05.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondents accused. The appeal arises out of an order of acquitted with regard to riots in the Mohalla- Murlia Chak. The case arises out of Sitamarhi P.S. Case no.305 of 1992 since arises out of communal case the counter case has been lodged as Sitamarhi P.S. Case no. 306 of 1992. After forgoing into the entire evidence of the witnesses including that the Investigating Officer it appears that the mob consisting of over one thousand persons belonging to Janki Asthan,Punaura Kharka and Mushahari Tola and Gaushala Chowk leading burning and looting of shops around Gaushala Chowk and proceeded Murlia Chak Mohalla and thereafter looted and burnt them. 2 However, learned trial court considered the evidence of the witnesses lead evidence about large scale damage and destruction to the properties belonging not only to the Muslims but also belonging to the members of Hindu community and the D.W. 10 who admittedly is the Investigating Officer of the counter case viz. Sitamarhi P.S. Case no. 306 of 1992 confirmed that shops of Hindu situated at Gaushala Chowk and houses of Hindus situated at Murli Chak about 30 in number were looted,burnt and damaged by the mob of the rioters. The individual houses of Hindus and Muslims are not segregated but are situated almost next to each other. The evidence of the witnesses indicates that the witnesses have stated the name of the accused and claimed to have seen and identified specific members of the mob without any specific overact and hence evidence regarding the identification cannot be accepted as it lacks confidence and are neither probable nor convincing evidence and same cannot be considered as reliable and there is tendency to implicate persons of other community. Hence from perusal of entire evidence it is apparent that there is tendency 3 to falsely implicate and the evidence suffer from infirmity as are neither cognizant reliable nor trustworthy and the witnesses named the accused but no overact the learned trial court have well considered this aspects of the matter in great detail well appreciating the evidence of the parties and hence I do not find any demerit in the impugned judgment and hence I not any find merit in this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. Amit (Gopal Prasad,J.)