IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1272 of 2010 Daya Shankar Yadav, Son of Late Harendra Yadav, resident of Village- Saraiya, P.S. Barhara (Krishnagardh), District- Bhojpur at Ara…………..Victim/Private Party……………………………..Appellant. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Amit Yadav, Son of Raj Kishore Yadav. 3. Punam Devi @ Panna Devi, wife of Raj Kishore Yadav. All residents of Village- Saraiya, P.S. Barhara (Krishnagarh), District- Bhojpur at Ara………………………………………………………..Respondents. 3. 18.10.2011. None appears for the appellant. However, learned counsels for the respondents are present. The charges were framed under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act against respondent no.2 whereas against respondent no. 3 under Sections 302, 149, 337, 307 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Surprisingly, it appears from paragraph no. 6 of the judgment that the informant, doctor and Investigating Officer failed to depose before the learned court below in spite of all efforts being made by the prosecution. Three witnesses have been examined by the prosecution. Their inter se evidences are not only found inconsistent by the learned court below but it appears that 2 prosecution witnesses have also shifted the place of occurrence, as per the informant the occurrence took place near the Nad Charan(cattle feeding place) whereas as per P.W. 1 the occurrence took place on the main road. We find no perversity in appraisal of the evidences by the learned trial court. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. U. K. (Shyam Kishore Sharma,J) ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)