IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.8 of 2008 ANANDI TANTI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 28.11.2008 The appellant, who is the complainant of Complaint Case No.760©/96, has come against the order of reversal of conviction passed by the learned Additional Sessions, F.T.C.I, Saharsa in Criminal Appeal No.3 of 1999/4 of 1999 under sections 380/34, 420,498 and 109 of the Penal Code. Learned trial court came to the finding that the charges against the accused persons are made out under the aforesaid sections. In paragraph 25 of the judgment, it is stated that the accused Saini Das, the father-in-law of the appellant used to live in his house. The petitioner is in service at Madhepura. One Upendra Sah also used to come and meet his wife Rekha Devi. It is further stated that his wife Rekha Devi left her house along with a box containing cloths, ornaments worth Rs.8,000/- and cash worth Rs.5,000/- with aforesaid persons. Against the judgment of conviction, the accused persons preferred appeal. The learned appellate court came to the finding that the factum of marriage of the appellant with Rekha Devi has not been fully established and the appellant has also failed to prove the illicit relation of his wife Rekha Devi with Upendra Sah. The learned appellate court further came to the finding that the complainant was not the eye witness of the occurrence and only P.W.3 who was the eye witness of the occurrence saw Rekha Devi going outside from the - 2 - KHAN house of the complainant with a box. The learned appellate court has also noticed that Rekha Devi has also filed a case against the complainant and some of the witnesses. It is well settled that in a case against acquittal, the jurisdiction of this court is very limited in interfering with the same. If two views are possible in a given case then the view that has been adopted by the learned court which has passed the impugned judgment is not to be disturbed. In view of the limited jurisdiction to interfere with the order of acquittal, this court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and as such the appeal is dismissed. In case the Opposite parties disturb the appellant in any away, it will be open to him to take recourse in accordance with law. (S.P.Singh,J)