IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1217 of 2007 RAMA MUNI KUMHAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ------------------ S.Sb/- (Madhavendra Saran, J.) 02/ 25-09-2008 Heard. This revision has been preferred by the informant against the judgment of acquittal recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, Rohtas at Sasaram in Sessions Trial No. 210 of 2004. It appears on the record that the charges were framed against the accused persons on 10.1.2005. Thereafter several adjournments were given for examination of witnesses. Out of five witnesses the prosecution examined only P.W. 1 Dayashankar Kumhar on 4.5.2007. Thereafter again some adjournments were given and ultimately the prosecution evidence was closed on 31.7.07. It further appears that on the date of closure of evidence of prosecution no prayer was made on behalf of the informant and other witnesses for further time to produce the evidence. The learned court below by a well reasoned order has acquitted the accused persons. It has been submitted that no sufficient time was given to the prosecution to examine the prosecution witnesses. In my view, the argument of the learned counsel cannot be accepted. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no merit in the revision application. Accordingly, it is dismissed.