IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.424 of 2006 DAYALU PRASAD GUPTA Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 26.8.2008 This revision application has been preferred against the judgment and order passed by the Fast Track Court III, Bhagalpur in Sessions Case No.368 of 1998 thereby the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted opposite party no.2 but convicted other two accused persons. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It is submitted that opposite party no.2 was key figure in kidnapping. In course of trial a large number of witnesses supported the allegation against him. However, the learned trial court has acquitted opposite party no.2 on the basis of surmises and conjuncture. I have gone through the judgment. Paragraph 31 of the judgment is finding in respect of opposite party no.2. The learned trial court has raised doubt on his complicity in the alleged crime in absence of any corroborative evidence on the demand of ransom. The victim herself has not named this opposite party no.2. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in view of limited scope of revision, in case of order of acquittal, at the instance of private party, this court finds no material to interfere in the judgment and order. Accordingly, this revision application is dismissed. B.Jha (Ghanshyam Prasad)