IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.326 of 2008 RAM NANDAN PRASAD @ BAUAJEE Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SANJAY KUMAR @ SANJAY SHARMA 3. PRAVEEN KUMAR ------ 2 28.11.2008 This revision has been preferred against the order dated 30.1.2008 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge IX, Patna in Sessions Trial No. 624/06. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that no serious efforts were made by the court below to examine the witnesses and the case was closed in haste and the accused persons in a case like double murder have been acquitted. However, on perusal of the impugned judgment it appears that the case has been decided under the direction of the Hon’ble Court within certain stipulated period. Paragraph 6 of the judgment would go to show that even the A.P.P.conceded before the court below that not a single witness turned up to support the prosecution story. It is a case of no evidence. In the facts and the circumstances I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment of no evidence. Accordingly, this application stands rejected. B.Jha (Ghanshyam Prasad)