IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.821 of 2008 SANTOSH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA….Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR …Opposite Party ----------- 2. 18.12.2008. This revision application has been preferred against the judgment dated 29.5.2008 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTC-III, Buxar in Cr. Appeal No. 41 of 2003 thereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.9.2003 passed by Judicial Magistrate, IInd Class, Buxar in G. R. No. 595 of 1998 and T. R. No. 1406 of 2003 has been set aside. It appears that learned magistrate vide judgment dated 18.9.2003 convicted the accused under Section 323 and 337 IPC and sentenced him to undergo S.I. for two months under Section 337 I.P.C. and S.I. for three months under Section 323 I.P.C. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that learned FTC has not properly appreciated the oral evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution and has wrongly acquitted the accused. However, on perusal of the impugned judgment it is quite apparent that the court below has acquitted the accused after proper consideration of oral evidence as well as the - 2 - lacuna in the prosecution evidence. The case is also of petty nature. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances, this court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned judgment in revisional jurisdiction in such nature of cases. No case is made out for interference. Accordingly, this application is rejected. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)