IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (DB) No 640 of 2011 Bhola Purvey –Versus- The State of Bihar *** 2 11.07.2011 Heard on the point of admission at length. This is an appeal in terms of proviso to Section 372 of Criminal Procedure Code, by the informant. Learned counsel submits that the judgment of acquittal is unsustainable. We have perused the judgment. The trial Court has noted various circumstances for not relying upon the prosecution case rather giving benefit of doubt to the accused persons. None of the reasoning given is either perverse or unfounded. The trial Court has noted that for the same occurrence, there was a case and a counter case. In the case in which the appellant was the accused, the appellant and others have been found guilty and the incident, as narrated or as sought to be projected by the appellant in that case, was rejected by the Court as unsustainable. The trial Court has, inter alia, opined that in view of the said finding, it would not be proper now in these proceedings to accept the defence of the appellant who is the informant of the present case. That would lead to conflicting findings by Court of competent jurisdiction which is not desirable. The trial Court has recorded categorical finding as to why it cannot rely upon the evidence of the Investigating Officer or for that matter the medical evidence. They are bundle of confusion and contradiction. We, having perused the judgment and heard the learned counsel, do not feel persuaded to take a different view of the matter in the 2 facts as brought on record. This appeal, therefore, is not admitted and is dismissed as such. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh) (Ashwani Kumar Singh)