IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.89 of 2010 RAM CHANDRA YADAV son of Bino Yadav, resident of vill.-Pirnagara, P.S.-Beldaur, Distt.-Khagaria ------------Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR -------------- 3. 10.3.2010 Heard the parties. P.W.4 and P.W.5 are seizure list witnesses and said independent witnesses have turned hostile even then recovery is accepted by both the courts whose concurrent findings are about recovery of a loaded pistol and seven cartridges in Vindoliya from petitioner’s possession.Turning hostile of P.Ws. 4 and 5 is submitted to doubt the recovery. The seizure list is exhibited in the case. At the one hand, P.W.1 and raiding party members P.Ws. 2, 3 and 8 are examined to state the recovery from petitioner’s possession on the other hand P.Ws. 4 and 5 are not denying their signatures on the seizure list rather denying their presence. Rightly they have been declared hostile. Members of raiding party have no concern with the petitioner except he was caught by them and arm and cartridges were recovered. It is said that he has been arrested when raiding party came to the village of Punit Yadav from whose house petitioner was coming out appears not improbable. Ballistic report of P.W.6 is not questioned showing the seized arms and cartridges as effective and live. So there appears no illegality in the order concluding that recovery was made from the possession of the petitioner. Another attempt is made by the learned counsel to minimize the sentence but - 2 - that also is awarded to minimum and no circumstance exists to minimize below the minimum after giving reasoning. Finding no illegality in the order impugned this revision application is dismissed at the stage of admission. Sudip ( Mandhata Singh, J. )