IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.61 of 2010 1. SURYA RAM son of late Bodha Ram, Resident of Belwa, P.S. Kishanganj, District Kishanganj………..Petitoner. Versus 1. MD. ISRAIL son of Hazi Usimudin, Resident of Babban Duwa P.S. Kishanganj, District Kishanganj, 2. State of Bihar………………………….. Opp. Party. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha. Mr. Diwakar Sinha, Adv. For the State : Mr. Ajay Mishra, A.P.P. For the O.P.No.2 : Mr. Sunil Kumar Mr.Ranjit Kumar, Advs. 8 11.01.2011 This is an application for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 17th April 2010 of acquittal as passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge cum-Special Judge, SC/S.T. (P.O.A.)) Act, Purnea under Sessions Trial No. 713 of 2000/ Spl. J. Trial No.40 of 2000 whereunder the O.P.No.1 was tried for the charges u/s 147, 323, 384 and 379 IPCX as well as Section 3 (iii) (iv) of the S.C/S.T.(P.O.A.) Act and was acquitted of the charges. The complainant’s case was that he has got 2 acres of land settled by the State of Bihar and that O.P.No.1 Md. Iisrail who is a contractor engaged in extracting sand from the land, unauthorizedly extracted sands worth Rs.50,000/- (fifth thousand) from his land under area little about 1 acre and he sold the sand and that by extracting the sand he dug out one acre of complainant’s land and made it useless. The date of occurrence was stated to be 11th June 1999 at 12:00 Noon. Further case of the complainant was that when he went to the Office of the O.P.No.1 to complain about the extraction of sand from his land, the 2 O.P.No.1 and his henchmen captured him, assaulted and abused him saying “Sala Harijan” and that he was got paraded in the local market with his Dhoti worn on his body and his shirt removed and that the O.P.No.1 and his men also forcibly took his L.T.I. on some papers. Learned trial court considered that the specific case of the complainant was that out of 2 acres of land, settled to him, the O.P.No.1 allegedly extracted and took away sand from 1 acre of land and when the complainant filed documents regarding settlement of land to him, it was found that the complainant had been settled with only 1 acre of land by the State of Bihar. It was considered by the trial court that since only 1 acre of land had been settled to the complainant, the very substratum of the case collapsed because the complainant was already in possession of 1 acre of land and the sand was taken away from another 1 acre of land which was not settled to the complainant. The learned trial court also considered that there are many infirmities and inconsistency in the evidence of the witnesses regarding the alleged occurrence of abusing and assault. The learned trial court considered that one witness stated that the abuse was given in the term “Sala Harijan” but other witnesses said that the abuse was in the term “Sala Chamar”. It is not the case of the complainant that both the abuses were given or that the other one as given by the witness was at all uttered by the O.P.No.1. As to the occurrence of getting the complainant paraded in the local market the learned 3 trial court considered that according to P.W.3 the complainant was got paraded while he was wearing Kurta and Lungi whereas according to the complainant himself, he was got paraded with his Dhoti only and shirt removed whereas according to P.W.4 the complainant was got paraded even with his Dhoti removed. Thus, there was serious and material contradiction making the prosecution story highly doubtful in this regard. In such view of the matters, the learned trial court did not find the charges proved beyond doubt and recorded the judgment of acquittal. I do not find any perversity and illegality in the judgment passed by the learned trial court. Therefore, this application is dismissed. Jay/ (C. M . Prasad, J.)