IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Govt. Appeal (DB) No.7 of 2011 The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Saharsa………………………………………………………..…Appellant. Versus 1. Fekoo Yadav, S/O Sri Swaroop Lal Yadav. 2. Fuleshwar Yadav, S/O Late Sirfu Yadav. 3. Ashok Yadav, S/O Fekoo Yadav. All residents of Village- Parasbannia, P.S. Salkhua, District- Saharsa……………Respondents. 8. 25.11.2011. Heard learned counsels for the appellant and the respondents. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant the State of Bihar against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 14.07.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.-III), Saharsa, in S.T. Case No. 117 of 2007/S.T.Case No. 91 of 2008 whereby the learned trial court has acquitted the respondent nos. 1 to 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the learned court below found the evidence of the informant P.W.8 unimpeached whereas P.w.9 was not cross examined with regard to manner of occurrence. Admittedly, even as per evidence of P. Ws. 8 and 9, the assailants were Sunil Yadav and Sushil Yadav who have been convicted. This is settled principle that 2 there is no embargo on the appellate court reviewing the evidence upon which an order of acquittal is based. Generally, the order of acquittal shall not be interfered with because the presumption of innocence of the accused is further strengthened by acquittal. The golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted. The paramount consideration of the court is to ensure that miscarriage of justice is prevented. A miscarriage of justice which may arise from acquittal of the guilty is no less than from the conviction of an innocent. In a case where admissible evidence is ignored, a duty is cast upon the appellate court to reappreciate the evidence where the accused has been acquitted, for the purpose of ascertaining as to whether any of the accused really committed any offence or not. The principle to be followed by the 3 appellate court considering the appeal against the judgment of acquittal is to interfere only when there are compelling and substantial reasons for doing so. If the impugned judgment is clearly unreasonable and relevant and convincing materials have been unjustifiably culminated in the process. It is a compelling reason for interference. We do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment of acquittal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. -U. K. (Shyam Kishore Sharma,J) ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)