IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.53 of 2009 EARNEST PAUL S/O-Late H.A. Paul, R/O-Moh.-State Bank Colony, Digha, P.S.-Digha, Distt.-Patna. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.Smt. Hilda George W/O-George C. Mathew 3.Rajesh Mathew S/O-George C. Mathew 4.Ramesh Mathew S/O-George C. Mathew 5.George C. Mathew S/O- C. Mathew All are R/O-Moh.-Banskothi, behind of fair field Colony, P.S.-Digha, Distt.-Patna. 6.Ajay S/O-Igneous Francis, R/O-Banskothi, behind fair field Colony, P.S.-Digha, Distt.-Patna. Permanent Address:- Church Road, Christian Quarter, P.S.-Betiah, Distt.-Betiah. 7.Naurin S/O-Benjamin Joseph, R/O-Balupar, Kurji, P.S.-Digha, Distt.-Patna. 8.Vimal Lakra S/O-J.B. Lakra, R/O-Banskothi, Krishna Colony, P.S.-Digha, Distt.-Patna. 9.Moris Peter S/O-Michael Peter, R/O-Fairfield Colony, Balupar, P.S.-Digha, Distt.-Patna. ************** For the Appellant :- Rajoday Satyeet (Advocate) For the State :- Dr. Mayanand Jha (A.P.P.) For the O.P. No. 2 to 9 :- Pankaj Kumar Sinha (Advocate) Kamal Kishore Jha (Advocate) Diwakar Sinha (Advocate) ********************* 6/ 13.08.2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for O.P. No. 2 to 9. The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 05.02.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna in Complaint Case No.- 738C/2002/T.R. No.- 585 of 2009 whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted all the accused persons from the charges for the offences under Sections 149/ 380/ 427/ 447 of the Indian Penal Code regarding theft of bricks from Plot No. 3492 of 2 fair field colony, Digha, Patna between the night of 11/12.04.2002. The complainant has alleged that the wall erected by him was demolished and accused persons committed theft and causing loss of Rs. 20,000/- to him. The complaint was filed under the aforesaid Sections and the accused persons who was tried under Sections 380/442/447 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant examined four witnesses. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that the accused persons have been acquitted because the independent witnesses were not examined and on the presumption only interested witnesses have been examined and there were some minor discrepancies. Learned Counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Rama Sundar Giri & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar reported in 2005(2) PLJR 311 and it has been submitted that evidence of interested witnesses 3 cannot be thrown out simply on the ground that they are related to the deceased or to each other. Learned Counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Lal Babu Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar reported in 2006(1) PLJR 81 and it has been submitted that on account of such discrepancies neither the evidence of witnesses should be totally discarded nor prosecution case should be held false when prosecution case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt against some accused. Relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of America Rai & Anr. Vs. State of Bihar reported in 2005(4) PLJR 101 and it has been submitted that if some minor discrepancies appeared in the evidence of witnesses, the accused should not be acquitted. I have perused the judgment and prima facie the case appears to be a case of civil natue because the Title Suit has been contested between the parties. The enmity already existed. 4 The definite case of the complainant is that the occurrence was not witnessed by him and it was witnessed by others. The judgments cited above are not applicable because those circumstances which are available in those decisions are not available in this case. Independent witnesses were present but theft was not involved. The discrepancies have to be considered in the light of the pendency of the Title Suit. Considering this, the court has rightly acquitted the accused persons. All the facts and circumstances are discussed in the impugned judgment. The impugned judgment is not illegal or perverse. Considering all these, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. Accordingly, it is dismissed. kksinha/ (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.)