IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.79 of 2010 BHUNESHWAR DUBEY Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 23.09.2010 This is an application for leave to file appeal against the judgment of acquittal as passed by the J.M.1stClass, Motihari in Complaint Case No. 173 of 2001/Tr. No. 1101 of 2010 whereby the O.P.Nos. 2 to 6 have been acquitted of the charges under sections 147, 323, 504 and 379 IPC. The case of the complainant was that on 11th November 2001 while he was going to the market on a bicycle and when he reached near his agricultural field, he saw that the O.P.Nos. 2 to 6 were ploughing it. The complainant went there and protested them whereupon they assaulted him with fists and slaps and the appellant Shambhu Bhagat gave Lathi blow causing injury on the head. Further allegation was that O.P. Krishna Bhagat and Sunil Bhagat snatched complainant’s bicycle, wrist watch and cash of Rs.1,200/-. As many as four witnesses were examined by the petitioner-complainant. The evidence of witnesses was critically considered by the learned trial court. The witnesses consistently stated that the O.P. Shambhu Bhagat assaulted the complainant causing bleeding injury on his head but the injury certificate did not mention any injury on the head and simple injury was found on arm and back. The doctor also testified that there was no injury on the head. Due 2 to these infirmities and contradictions, the learned trial court considered that the allegation of assault was highly doubtful because what the witnesses said was in quite contradiction to the medical report and the evidence of the doctor. Besides this, the learned trial court also considered that the complainant described in the complaint that the P.O. was his field but any detail of the land by mentioning the Khata and Khesra Number was not mentioned and, therefore, the P.O. was not ascertained. Besides this, it was also considered by the learned trial court that P.W.2 deposed that the P.O. was on the road. Thus, there was categorical contradiction about the P.O. as in the statement of the complainant and the statement of witnesses. On these grounds, the learned trial court came to find that the complainant’s case was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and, therefore, the O.P.Nos. 2 to 6 were acquitted of the charges. Considering the facts and circumstances as considered by the learned trial court, I fail to find any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. I find no ground to accord permission for filing appeal in this case. In the result the S.L.A. is dismissed at the stage of admission itself. Jay/ (C. M . Prasad, J.)