IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.400 of 2007 SUNIL KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE RAMCHARITRA SINGH --- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SANTRAM SINGH S/O LATE MAHAVIR SINGH 3. PRAKASH SINGH S/O LATE MAHAVIR SINGH 4. PAWAN KUMAR @ PAWAN YADAV SON OF NOT KNOWN 5. RAM UDGAR PD. YADAV @ RAM UDGAR YADAV S/O NANNULAL YADAV 6. MANOHAR YADAV SON OF NOT KNOWN 7. SANJAY KUMAR SON OF GIBU PD. YADAV. --- OPP.PARTIES. For the Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Manbansh, Advocate. For the O.Ps : Mr. Amardeep, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ----------- 06 26.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State and the opposite parties. Petitioner is the informant who ignited the present criminal proceeding which gave rise to Trial no. 419 of 2006. The accuseds ( opposite party nos. 2 to 7 herein) were charged under Sections 420, 466, 467 and 468 of the Penal Code. Allegation is that few sale deeds were executed by impersonating the informant and his brother who was already dead. Trial ended in acquittal. At the trial ten prosecution witnesses were examined. PWs 1, 2 and 3 were tendered by the prosecution. PWs 6, 7, 8 and 10 in their respective depositions pleaded complete ignorance about the case. Informant (P.W.5) in his deposition accepted that pursuant to the aforesaid alienation the possession of the informant was not disturbed relating to the land in question. It is also admitted that a Title Suit has already been filed by him. In the background of these facts emanating from the record learned trial Court has passed the impugned order which, in my view, does not suffer from any patent illegality. There is no merit in this application. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)