IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.646 of 2006 RAMIA DEVI Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 5 08.05.2009 The informant has preferred this revision application against the order dated 13.06.2006 passed by Sri K. Ram, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Supaul in Complaint Case No. 919(C)/2005, whereby he dismissed the complaint petition. Initially a Complaint Case No. 261 of 2004 has been filed under Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code, against one unknown person for kidnapping of her son. Thereafter the Magistrate referred the matter to the police under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. The Police after investigation submitted final report not finding the case to be true. Thereafter the instant case has proceeded on complaint. Learned counsel submits that four witnesses were examined in course of enquiry and they consistently stated that accused persons kidnapped the victim Satya Prakash Sah aged about 17 years. It would appear from the impugned order that the trial court - 2 - found that the evidence of the witnesses contradict with each other. It is submitted that the victim who was kidnapped did not say that while he was cutting straw four persons came there and asked him to go along with them. There is further discrepancy as to who came and forcibly took the victim on the motor-cycle. Having considered the facts of the case, this court does not find any infirmity in the order of the learned trial court dated 13.06.2006 dismissing the complaint, as such I do not find any merit in this revision application and the same is dismissed. Kundan (S. P. Singh, J.)