Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 20 OF 1997 Against the judgment and order dated 08.01.1997 passed by Sri Braj Nandan Sahay, 7th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Chapra in S.Tr. No. 220/82. ************ 1. Bhagwan Rai. 2. Harihar Rai. 3. Prabhu Rai. All Sons of Ram Sevak Rai. Resident of Village- Harpur, P.S.-Baniyapur, District-Chapra. 4. Prashuram Kuer, S/o Daroga Kuer. 5. Lorha Kuer, S/o Deva Kuer. R/o Village-Bangra (Nadipar), P.S.-Jalalpur, District-Chhapra. …… (Appellants) Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR-------(Opposite Party) ************* For the Appellants : Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma-I, Adv. For the State : Mr. R.B. Roy “Raman”, APP. ************** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J. 1. The appellants have been convicted under Section 395 IPC and sentenced to RI for five years by the 7th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Chhapra in S.Tr. No. 220/82 by a judgment dated 08.01.1997. 2. The case of the prosecution according to the informant is that on the night of 10/11.04.1975 a dacoity was committed in his house in which he identified the present five appellants. 3. During trial the informant died and, therefore, he could not be examined on behalf of the prosecution. On behalf of the prosecution five witnesses were examined. P.W. 1 and P.W. 4 are formal witnesses whereas P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 are inmates of the house who were main identifying witnesses. P.W. 5 is the Doctor who examined the three injured inmates. During trial P.W. 2 stated that he was 2 10 years of age on the date of occurrence and out of fear he had not identified any of the accused persons. He also stated that three appellants i.e. Harihar Rai, Prabhu Rai and Bhagwan Rai were co-villagers with whom they had land dispute. P.W. 3 the daughter-in-law of the informant is said to have identified the five appellants but she also stated that the appellants were well known to them and also that none of the accused persons had concealed their identity. 4. The appeal deserves to be allowed solely for the reason that it is highly improbable that a known person would commit dacoity without concealing his identity. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the judgment dated 08.01.1997 passed by the 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Chhapra in S.Tr. No. 220/82 is, hereby, set aside. The appellants are acquitted of the charges and discharged of the liability of their bail bonds. (Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court, Patna, Dated, the 11th July, 2011. NAFR/Vikash/-