IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.10 of 2008 DANA LAL MUKHIA, SON OF THAKKAN MUKHIA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- STAN PATTI, P.O/ HULASH, RAGHOPUR, P.S. RAGHOPUR, DISTRICT-SUPAUL ------------ PETITIONER Versus (1) STATE OF BIHAR OPPOSITE PARTY IST SET (2) KULDEEP THAKUR, SON OF CHOUTHI THAKUR (3) BHUPENDRA THAKUR (4) UPENDRA THAKUR (5) SURENDRA THAKUR All sons of Kuldeep Thakur (6) RAMU THAKUR, SON OF LATE GANGAY THAKUR (7) DILIP THAKUR, SON OF GANAPAT THAKUR (8) SIYARAM THAKUR, SON OF RABBI THAKUR (9) KAPIL THAKUR (10) BAM SHANKAR THAKUR Both sons of Siyaram Thakur All residents of Village-Satan Patti, P.O. Hulash, Raghopur, P.S. Raghopur, District-Supaul. (No.2 to 10 accused) OPPOSITE PARTIES 2ND SET ----------- 02/ 2-12-2008 Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact the case makes out an offence under Sections 452, 307 and 380 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code but unfortunately cognizance has been taken only under Sections 147, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and charges have been framed under those Sections only. The appellant may be having a point but as trial proceeded under Sections 147, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of acquittal. In case the Opposite Party continues to create trouble in future it would be open to the appellant to report the same to appropriate authorities for taking appropriate action. With the aforesaid observation the grant of leave is declined. S.Sb/- (S.P. Singh, J.)