IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1393 of 2007 RAM CHANDRA PRASAD YADAV, SON OF ROUSHAN YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHILMIL, P.S.- BARAHAT, DISTRICT- BANKA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SAVITRI DEVI, WIFE OF PRADIP KUMAR SINGH @ PRADIP SINGH @ PRADIP KUMAR MANDAL 3. PRADIP KUMAR SINGH @ PRADIP SINGH @ PRADIP KUMAR MANDAL, SON OF KUTAI MANDAL BOTH 2 AND 3 ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KARSOKA, P.S.- SHAMBHUGANJ, DISTRICT- BANKA. For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Veena Rani Prasad, A.P.P. ----------- 5 28.06.2010 Petitioner, who is the informant of the case, assails the judgment and order of acquittal dated 27.7.2007 recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Banka in Tr. No. 145 of 2007 whereby the opposite parties herein were tried and acquitted of the charge punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, the opposite parties herein(wife and husband respectively) were paid a sum of Rs. 9,000/- for securing a job for the ward of the informant. Neither job was secured nor the amount was returned. Learned Trial Court on consideration of the evidence brought on record has found and held that the evidence fell grossly short of proving the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubts. It has also taken into consideration the fact that the informant had earlier filed an identical case against another set of accused(s) which had ultimately failed. 2 This Court does not find any patent illegality and/or infirmity in the order passed by the learned Trial Court. There is no merit in this revision application. It is accordingly dismissed. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )