IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.49 of 2007 PREMAN SAO Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SMT. TARA DEVI 3. SANJAY KUMAR 4. RANJIT KUMAR ----------- 8. 30.01.2009 Heard the parties. The complainant-petitioner takes exception to the judgment and order dated 10.4.2007, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Jehanabad in Tr.No.494 of 2007, whereby and whereunder the accuseds (O.P.Nos.2 to 4) were acquitted of the charges framed under sections 147,148,323,452,324 and 380 IPC. The dispute relates to title and possession of a dwelling houses. The complainant claims the house by virtue of a sale-deed executed by one Sitaram Sao in favour of the complainant (Rampati Devi, PW2). On the other hand the accuseds claim half share in the house being the wife and son of Rameshwar Sao. Admittedly, Sitaram Sao and Rameshwar Sao are/were full brothers. The documents which have been placed on record by the defence do indicate that the title suit filed by the opposite parties in respect of the disputed house is pending between the parties. Learned counsel for the complainant also admitted before this Court that the title suit relating to title and possession of the disputed house is going on between the parties. In this factual scenario, the trial court, apart from noticing the discrepancy in evidence, has also taken into account the fact that - 2 - not a single independent witness has been examined by the prosecution to prove the charge (s) beyond shadow of all reasonable doubts. This Court, on perusal of judgment and after hearing both sides, is of the view that no patent illegality has been committed by the court in consideration of the matter and recording the order of acquittal. The application seeking leave to appeal stands dismissed. However, this Court only observes that the civil case which is said to be pending between them shall not be prejudiced by the fate of this criminal proceeding. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )