IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.210 of 2009 SHEO NARAIN PASWAN …PETITIONER Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. MANGO @ MANGAL PASWAN 3. ASIA @ ASHA DEVI 4. GONU PASWAN @ GONI 5. FULEHI PASWAN 6. SUNIL PASWAN 7. JHAKSU PASWA …OPPOSITE PARTIES For the petitioner :Mr.Shashi Bhushan For the State :Dr. Indiwar Kumari,APP ----------- 2. 28.09.2010 Petitioner is the informant. P.W. 5 is igniter of the prosecution which gave rise to Sessions Trial No.468/95/76/2007 in which learned trial court by order impugned has recorded a finding of not guilty under sections 436/34 and 323. It appears that some of the accuseds were also additionally charged but acquitted under section 325 IPC. An FIR was lodged with an allegation that the mother of the petitioner was assaulted by co-accused Sunil Paswan and subsequently the accused persons set afire the house of the informant. At the trial five witnesses were examined. P.Ws.1 and 2 have not been found eye-witnesses to the occurrence. P.W.3 has been declared hostile at the instance of the prosecution. P.Ws.4 and 5 are the sister of the informant and informant himself respectively. Admittedly, neither the I.O. nor the doctor has been examined. Learned trial court has taken a view that non-examination of I.O. proved fatal in the present 2 case so far as allegation under 436 is concerned. As noticed earlier, the doctor was not examined in the case. The injured mother of the informant was also not examined. In the backdrop of these facts emanating from records, learned trial court has found that prosecution has not been able to prove the charge(s) beyond shadow of reasonable doubts. The consideration of the matter by learned trial court cannot be said to be perverse and/or perfunctory meriting interference. The application lacks merit which is accordingly dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )