GOVT. APPEAL (SJ) No.46 OF 1989 *** Against the judgment and order dated 28.06.1989 passed by Sri B. K. Jain, Judicial Magistrate, 1st , Class, Patna City in G.R. case no.195 of 1986 / T.R. No.290 of 1989 *** THE STATE OF BIHAR … Appellant Versus 1. SHASHI KANT JHA @ BHOLA S/o Thakan Jha (Dead) & 2. Hari Kant Jha S/o Lallan Jha, R/o village- Lodikatra, P.S. Khajekalan, District- Patna … Respondents *** For the appellant : Mr. S. N. Prasad, A. P. P. For the respondents : Mr. Ram Swarup Prasad, Advocate *** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH *** Anjana Prakash, J. This Government Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 28.6.1989 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patna City, in G. R. Case No.195 of 1986, T.R. No.290 of 1989, by which the accused persons i.e. respondents have been acquitted from the charge under section 386 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent no.1 died and, therefore, the appeal stood abated with regard to respondent no.1 by order dated 27.4.2005. 3. The prosecution case as per the written report of PW 3 is that he was kerosene oil dealer and on 20.2.1986 at 4.15 PM at his depot two unknown accused persons came and on gun point snatched his briefcase. It was stated that the accused Shahi Kant Jha was previously working for the informant and he had been removed on account of mal practice and thereafter he threatened and attempted to extort money from the informant. 2 4. During trial, the prosecution examined six witnesses, out of whom, PW 1, PW 2, P.W 6 are formal witnesses, whereas, PW3 is the informant and PW 4 is another employee of PW3. PW 5 is the Investigating Officer. The trial court while considering the case appreciated the evidence of the witnesses and acquitted the accused persons on account of non-examination of independent eye witnesses and that PW 4 in his cross-examination stated that he did not identify any accused person. The trial court also considered that earlier there was a dispute between the parties and, in fact, as per the admission of the informant himself, respondent no.1 Shashi Kant Jha was his own employee earlier. 5. On going through the evidence of the witnesses and the entire materials as also the judgment of acquittal, I find no merit in this appeal. 6. In the result, this Government Appeal is dismissed having no merit. (Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court Patna. Dated the 3rd November, 2009. NAFR/ JA/-