IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.140 of 2009 RAMBALI DAS SON OF LATE BHOLA DAS --- PETITIONER Versus 1. AWDESH @ AWADH SAH S/O NIRAKH SAH 2. MAHESH SAH ( BOTH SONS OF AWDESH @ AWADH SAH) 3. RAJESH SAH 4. STATE OF BIHAR --- OPP. PARTIES. For the Petitioner : Mr. Alok Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ----------- 02 16.09.2010 Petitioner is the son of the informant and assails the judgment and order of acquittal recorded by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dalsing Sarai, Samastipur in General Registration no. 70 of 2002( Tr. Registration no. 257 of 2008). It is stated that during the pendency of the trial the informant died and as such the petitioner being the son of the victim/informant of the case has filed the present case. It is contended that learned trial Court based on conjectures passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. I have gone through the impugned judgment. Learned trial Court has found that there was inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. As per the prosecution case occurrence had taken place on 04.03.2002 whereas the case was lodged on 08.03.2002. Going by the reasons assigned in paragraph nos. 10 and 11 of the impugned judgment, this Court is satisfied that the impugned judgment cannot be said to be patently illegal and/or perfunctory meriting interference. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)