IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1125 of 2009 Paras Nath Ray, son of Sri Hitnarayan Ray, resident of Village- Isupur Nawal Tola Ami, P.S. Dighwara, District-Chapra (Saran). Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Ramjiwan Ray, son of Ram Briksha Ray. 3. Ram Briksha Ray, son of Late Panchhi Ray. Both resident of Village-Isupur Nawal Tola Ami, P.S.-Dighwara, District-Chapra (Saran). Opposite Parties. For the petitioner: 1. Mr. Ram Kishore Singh, Advocate. 2. Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State-Indu Bala Pandey, A.P.P. ----------- 3. 02.08.2011 The informant, petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 21st May, 2009 passed by the Learend Judicial Magistrate Ist Class in G.R. no. 1921 of 2001 Trial no. 145 of 2009 arising out of Dighwara P.S. Case no. 71 of 2001 by which the accused Opposite Party have been acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 379/34 I.P.C. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 25th June 2001 at about 3 P.M the accused entered into the house of the informant armed with dagger and iron rod. When he was napping, petitioner raised alarm both the accused armed with dagger and iron rod caused grievous injury on his person and they also took away the money bag containing Rs. 750/-. There is land dispute dispute between both the parties. On the fard-e- beyan of the petitioner Dighwara P.S. Case no. 71 of 2001 was instituted against both the accused. After investigation charge 2 sheet was submitted. Charges were framed for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 379/34 I.P.C. After trial it has been held that the prosecution has not been able to substantiate its case and the accused have been acquitted.. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even after sufficient evidence against the accused they have been acquitted. Even the doctor has found injury on the person of the informant. Learned counsel for the State submits that there is admitted fact that there is land dispute between both the parties and there is also counter version of the case. The accused Rambriksh Rai has also lodged a case against the informant and his brother Sanjay Kumar Ray (P.W.-1). The evidence of the prosecution witness is full of contradictions and as such the learned Magistrate has disbelieved their evidence and no interference in the impugned order is required. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of record it appears that the prosecution has examined altogether six witnesses out of whom P.W.-1 (Sanjay Kr. Ray) is the brother of the informant and P.W.-5 is the informant and victim of the occurrence. It appears that P.W.-1 (Sanjay Kr. Ray) has supported the prosecution case is examination-in-chief as eyewitness but in the cross-examination he has stated that when he reached at the place of occurrence, he found his brother fallen, there was injury on his person, on query his brother (informant) told him that accused assaulted 3 him with iron rod. Thereafter, he also got information that the accused have taken money. It appears that he is hearsay witness. Likewise P.W.-2, Biren Ray, P.W.-3, Awtar Ray @ Gorakh Ray and P.W.-4, Rameshwar Ray are also hearsay witnesses. P.W.-5 has also supported the prosecution case. In his evidence also- Contradictions have been found. P.W.-6, Doctor, Awdhesh Kumar has stated that he examined the informant. He has stated in his evidence that he has found all the injury caused by hard and blunt substance but P.W.-5, the informant has stated that he also got injury by the sharp cutting weapon. Considering all these materials the learned trial court has disbelieved the version of prosecution and has not relied upon the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. The doctor has also stated that the injury which has been caused to the informant can also be caused if one falls on any hard and blunt substance. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. In the result this petition is dismissed. Kamlesh (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)