IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.245 of 2008 LALMUNI UPADHYAY …. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 2. VINDHYACHAL UPADHYAY, 3. MOTI UPADHYAY AND 4. SANTOSH UPADHYAY … Opposite Parties. ----------- 2. 27.11.2008. N.H./ This revision has been preferred against the order of acquittal dated 5th December,2007 passed by Shri Om Prakash Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Bhabua in G.R. No.269 of 2002, Tr. No.385 of 2007. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was ample material before the court below for conviction but the court below arbitrarily not only closed the case without examination of the doctor but also acquitted the accused persons, who are opposite party. However, on perusal of the impugned order, it appears that there are several grounds for coming to the conclusion of not guilty. Apart from it, non-examination of the doctor, not even a single independent witness has been examined to support the prosecution story. Even the Injury Report has not been brought on the record and proved formally. Under the facts and circumstances, I find no merit to interfere in the impugned order of acquittal. Accordingly, this application is rejected. ( Ghanshyam Prasad )