IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.10 of 2009 MD.MAKSOOD ALAM Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. TABARAK HUSSSAIN 3. ARSHAD HUSSAIN 4. NAUSAD HUSSAIN 5. MD MUNNA 6. MD. SAHABUDDIN 7. MD. FAHIM For the petitioner:Mr.Ranjeet Kr.No.2 For the State :Mr.Z Hoda,APP ----------- 3. 04.02.2009 Heard. The complainant-petitioner aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal dated 19.9.2008 has filed the present application seeking leave to appeal. The trial court has acquitted the accused (O.P.Nos.2 to 7) of the charges framed under sections 147,452, 323 and 380 IPC. The trial court has taken note of the fact that the occurrence, as per the prosecution, had taken place inside a room. Referring to the evidence of the witnesses, it has been found and held that there was no occasion for them (PWs.) to see actually what happened inside the room. The trial court on appraisal of the evidence of the witnesses, has further concluded that the evidence is discrepant and frugal so far as the charges under sections 380 and 323 are concerned. From the judgment, it further appears that for the same occurrence a police case has been lodged by one of the co-accuseds, namely, Arshad Hussain in which the police, upon conclusion of investigation, submitted the charge-sheet and the present complainant is facing prosecution. This - 2 - fact has been admitted by the counsel for the petitioner before this Court. Having regard to these facts appearing from records, this Court is of the view that consideration of the matter by the learned trial court cannot be said to be patently illegal or perverse and interference shall not be justified. The application accordingly stands dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )