IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.286 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR ……. PETITIONER Versus SIKANDAR VERMA SON OF SRI BAIJU VERMA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BILAURI, P.S. LAKHISARAI, DISTRICT LAKHISARAI ….. OPPOSITE PARTY ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, A.P.P. For the Opposite Party : Md. Najmul Hoda, Advocate ----------- 6. 9.9.2009 Heard Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, A.P.P., for the petitioner and Mr. Najmul Hoda, Advocate for the opposite party. The present opposite party along with three other accused persons were prosecuted under Sections 224 and 225 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code in G.R.case No.237 of 2003. The three other accused persons had not appeared and, therefore, the trial proceeded only against the present opposite party as his case was split up. Subsequently on account of non-appearance of any of the witnesses, the trial court passed an order of acquittal. So far as the present opposite party is concerned, this suo motu revision is initiated against such order of acquittal. It is not in dispute that in the meantime other three accused persons were apprehended and the trial against them is about to commence. Since in the present case acquittal was based only on the ground of non-examination of the witnesses, in the interest of justice, we set aside such order of acquittal and direct that the opposite party shall also face trial along with other accused persons in G.R.case No.237 of 2003. - 2 - The revision application is allowed and the matter is remitted to the trial court for disposal afresh in accordance with law. Narendra/ ( P. K. Misra, CJ. ) ( Anjana Prakash, J. )