IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.365 of 2008 MOST.KAMROON NISA ..Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Sarjug @ Saryug Bishwas …opposite parties For the petitioner : Mr. Girish Pd. Gupta For o.p.no.2 :Mr.Ramesh Kr. Singh For the State : Mr.J.K.Singh 1, APP ----------- 03. 24.08.2010 Present application has been filed by the informant (P.W.5) aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal recorded by learned SDJM in G.R.No.1701/01/Trial No.935/08. The accused (O.P.No.2) was facing charge punishable under sections 493 and 504 IPC. In order to prove the charge(s), the prosecution examined five witnesses. The defence also adduced oral and documentary evidence. P.Ws.3 and 4 were produced as independent witnesses. They have not supported the prosecution case in course of their respective depositions. The daughter of the informant (P.W.2) has also not supported the prosecution. Learned trial court has carefully appraised the evidence of the informant (P.W.5) and has come to the conclusion that her evidence suffers from serious contradictions. Considering the background of case, as projected by the defence, learned trial court has come to the conclusion that evidence produced on behalf of prosecution failed to prove the charge(s) beyond reasonable doubts. This Court does not find any patent illegality in such consideration of materials by learned trial court. The application 2 is accordingly dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )