IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.12 of 2008 Kapildeo Prasad, son of Late Kishun Sao, resident of Mohalla- Saidpur, P.S. Kadamkuan, District- Patna. …. Complainant/Petitioner Versus 1. Ashok Kumar Gupta, 2. Raj Kumar Gupta. Both are the son of Late Kishun Sao and resident of Mohalla- Saidpur, P.S. Kadam Kuan, District- Patna 3. Ranjeet Kumar son of Late Shyam Babu Sah, Resident of Mohalla- Mahammadpur, P.S. Sultanganj, District- Patna. 4. Devi Lal son of Sri Charitar Sao 5. Pappu son of Sri Devi Lal Both are the resident of Mohalla- Chunauti Kuan, P.S.- Phulwari, Distt.- Patna. 6. Dhannu Sao son of Late Surju Sao, Resident of Mohalla- Kathakatal (Nanmuhia) P.S. Alamganj, Distt.- Patna. 7. Sanjay Kumar son of Sri Jai Ram Sao 8. Ajay Kumar son of Sri Jai Ram Sao, Both are the resident of Lodipur Chauraha (New Police Line Here), P.S.- Gandhi Maidan, District- Patna. 9. Nawal Prasad son of Not know, resident of village- Fatuha bazaar (Govindpur), P.S. Fatuha, Distt.-Patna. 10. Hari Prasad son of Late Sukhlal Sah, Resident of Mohalla- Ramna Road, P.S. Pirbahore, Distt.-Patna. … Accused/ Respondent 11. State of Bihar … Respondent/Appellant ----------- 8/ 15.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed challenging the judgment of acquittal dated 18.12.2007 passed by Sri Ramanuj Pd. Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, Xth, Patna in Cr. Appeal No.423 of 2007 reversing the judgment and order of conviction dated 24.9.2007 passed by Sri Prakash Mishra, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna, in Complaint Case no.369(c) of 1995/ Tr. No.875 of 2007, whereby the opposite party nos. 1 to 10 were convicted under section 148, 323, 380 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case is that the complainant was talking to his relative and brother-in-law in the room situated on the first floor of - 2 - the house, in question, when the occurrence is said to have taken place. It is alleged that the opposite party nos. 1 to10 pointed a pistol and tried to take away one box and also assaulted them with fists and slaps. First information report was lodged and the police after investigation found that the case has been instituted due to a civil dispute between the parties. Thereafter, protest petition was filed and on the basis of the protest petition this case proceeded. The appellate court while considering the evidence of the witnesses has found that both the parties live in the same house, civil dispute is pending with respect to the house and also found that there is no ingredient to show that offence under section 380 of the Indian Penal Code was committed. The allegation of assault is not substantiated as there is no injury report on the record. Both the parties are full brothers and the story that 20 persons entered in the house and went to the first floor of the house is unbelievable. The appellate court on consideration of the evidence and the facts aforesaid acquitted the accused-opposite party nos. 1 to 10. The judgment passed by the appellate court is based on cogent reasons. Considering the materials available on record, I find no reason to interfere with the same. Accordingly, this SLA is dismissed. JA/- (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)