CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 24 OF 1993 (U/S) Appeal against the judgment and order dated 29.12.1992 passed in Complaint Case No. 331C of 1990, Tr. No. 208 of 1992 by Sri Satish Chandra Srivastava, 1st Class Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai. NARAYAN RAM, Son of Lakhan Ram @ Thakan Ram, Resident of Sokhara, Police Station-Phulwaria, District-Begusarai. ………… (Appellant) Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. Sambhu Ram Son of Dina Ram. 3. Prem Nath Ram Son of Dina Ram. 4. Ganesh Ram Son of Dina Ram. 5. Lal Bahadur @ Lalsar Son of Dina Ram. 6. Dina Ram Son of Luktan Ram. 7. Champa Devi Wife of Dina Ram. 8. Tunki Devi Wife of Ganesh Ram. 9. Pratima Wife of Shambhu Ram. All are residents of Sokhara, except the State of Bihar, Police Station-Phulwaria, District- Begusarai. ………(Respondents) ----------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ************ Anjana Prakash, J. No one appears. The appellant is aggrieved by the acquittal of Respondent Nos. 2 to 9 for the offences under Sections 147, 323, 380 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Begusarai in Complaint Case No. 331C of 1990, Tr. No. 208 of 1992 by - 2 - an order dated 29.12.1992. The case of the prosecution is that being aggrieved on account of civil dispute filed by the father of the complainant respondents assaulted the complainant and committed theft. Charge was therefore framed under Sections 147, 323, 380 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. During trial the complainant examined six witnesses on his behalf out of whom PW 1, PW 2, PW 3, PW 4 and PW 5 on the point of the occurrence whereas PW 6 is the Doctor. The trial court while considering the case of the prosecution acquitted the respondents on doubting the witnesses who had given contradictory statements with regard to the occurrence. While considering the evidence of each of the witnesses, the trial court discussed the various lacunae and reasons for doubting the prosecution case. In the end, the trial court acquitted the respondents after a full discussion of the prosecution case. It also considered that the respondents had also filed the case of assault - 3 - upon them for which the defence had Exhibit-A. Moreover, in the background of the civil dispute between the parties the trial court was unable to arrive at a finding that the prosecution had proved its case beyond all reasonable doubts therefore acquitted the respondents. On going through the judgments and the entire evidence on record, I am also of the view that the prosecution witnesses have materially contradicted each other and in the background of civil dispute between the parties the possibility of false implication could not be ruled out. In the result, the appeal is dismissed as having no merit. Patna High Court Dated 14th December, 2009 NAFR/Vikash (Anjana Prakash, J.)