IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA G. APP. (DB) No.15 of 2011 THE STATE OF BIHAR ------ Petitioner Versus RAM KRISHNA PRASAD @ RAMU SHARMA SON OF KRISHNA MURARI SHARMA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARIYARPUR, AT PRESENT RAILWAY QUARTER NO.21/DFF(BSF),GOLF ROAD,P.S.JAMALPUR EAST COLONY,DISTRICT MUNGER ------- Respondent ------- 03/ 10.05.2011 Heard Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor for the appellant-State. This Govt.appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 9th June, 2010 passed by Sri Vijay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Munger in Sessions Trial No. 732 of 2007 whereby the sole accused Ram Krishna Prasad alias Ramu Sharma, who was charged under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, has been acquitted. Heard the submissions and perused the judgment impugned. The trial court has considered the circumstances and other materials available on record. The prosecution case was that the accused shot at the informant who got injured but the Investigating Officer did not find any blood at the place of occurrence nor any blood stained cloth was seized. The definite case of the prosecution was that when he was going on motorcycle, he saw the accused and 2 one unknown person in bush in the light of his motorcycle but the Investigating Officer has not found the marks of falling of the motorcycle at the place of occurrence nor he seized any motorcycle. The Investigating Officer has denied the fact that the informant has stated before him that he had identified the accused in the light of the motorcycle. These were the enough circumstances to disbelieve the sole testimony of the informant. The trial court considering all these circumstances came to the opinion that the prosecution has not been able to prove the charges beyond the shadow of all reasonable doubts and hence passed the impugned judgment acquitting the accused. We find no illegality or impropriety in the judgment. Hence, this appeal is dismissed. Since the appeal itself has been dismissed, there is no need to consider the limitation petition. The limitation petition also stands dismissed. Tahir/- ( Shyam Kishore Sharma, J. ) ( Gopal Prasad, J.)