IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.64 of 2007 RAM SINGH @ RAM AYODHYA PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4 28.7.2008 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The special leave to appeal has been filed against the Judgment of acquittal passed against opposite parties no.2 and 3 in a case under sections 341,323,379 and 504 of the I.P.C. The prosecution case , in short, is that when the complainant went to the Block Office for preparing his Land Possession Certificate the accused Subodh Kumar Singh, O.P.no.2 demanded Rs.500/- for this work and on refusal both opposite parties abused and assaulted him. The complainant examined three witnesses out of which P.W.2 and P.W.3 are not the eye witnesses.The trial court has noticed that the complainant stated that he had gone straight to the Chamber of the Block Development Officer and talked. Subodh Kumar stated that the occurrence took place in the chamber which is not the prosecution case. Further more. P.W.1 Shiv Chandra Prasad and C.W.2 Kameshwar Prasad are not eye witnesses of the occurrence. In the facts and circumstances of the case I do not find any material to interfere with the impugned judgment and order. This application is rejected. AnilK.sinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)