IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.249 of 2008 UPENDRI DEVI @ CHANDRAKALA DEVI ……. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 2. GUNESHWAR MAHTO, 3. NARAYAN MAHTO AND 4. YOGENDRA MAHTO …. Opposite Parites. ----------- 2. 27.11.2008. N.H./ This revision has been preferred against the order of acquittal dated 20th December,2007 passed by F.T.C. No.IV, Samastipur in Sessions Case No.34 of 1991. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The occurrence is of the year 1989. The case has already traveled for 19 years. In course of the trial, only two witnesses were examined. P.W.2 is a formal witness. P.W.1 is the informant, who is not the eye witness of the case. Under the facts and circumstances, there was no option before the court below but to acquit the accused persons. I find no merit in this revision. Accordingly, the same is rejected at the admission stage. ( Ghanshyam Prasad )