IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1557 of 2008 PAWAN YADAV …PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. TEJ NARAYAN @ KAILASH YADAV SON OF SRI BHUMI YADAV 3. BHUPENDRA YADAV @ KASHINDRA YADAV SON OF SRI MISHRILAL YADAV 4. RAJADEEP YADAV SON OF SRI BINDESHWARI YADAV …OPPOSITE PARTIES. For the petitioner: Mr.Anant kumar For the State : Mr.J. Upadhyay,APP ----------- 03. 24.08.2010 Present application has been filed questioning the legality of the order recording acquittal under section 307/34 IPC. It appears that on a consideration of materials placed on record, learned trial court has found that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge(s) beyond reasonable doubts. It further appears that eight prosecution witnesses were examined out of whom P.Ws. 1 to 4 were declared hostile at the instance of the prosecution. P.W.5 also did not support the prosecution case. P.W.6 is the informant who has deposed that after receiving injury he remained unconscious for two days. Learned trial court has found that FIR was lodged on the same day, i.e. 20.04.1997. Thus, apparent contradiction in the evidence of the informant was found by learned trial court. In the backdrop of these facts, an order of acquittal has been recorded. This Court does not find any patent illegality in consideration of the matter by learned trial court. There is no merit in this application which is accordingly dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )