Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Patna High Court - Orders

Abdul Rahim vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 16 February, 2018

Author: Ashutosh Kumar

Bench: Ashutosh Kumar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             Criminal Revision No.667 of 2015
                 =====================================
                 Abdul Rahim, Son of late Afuruddin, resident of Village
                 Saribari, Choundi, P.S. Barsoi, District Katihar.
                                                              ....   ....   Petitioner/s
                                              Versus
                 1. The State of Bihar.
                 2. Atik.
                 3. Ahsan.
                 Both Sons of late Afuruddin.
                 4. Mansoor.
                 5. Mamnoon.
                 6. Jiyaull Haque @ Ziaul.
                 All Sons of Ahsan.
                 7. Asgari, Wife of Atik.
                 8. Samsul, Son of Gajaffar.
                 All resident of Village-Saribari, Choundi, P.S. Barsoi, District
                 Katihar.
                 9. Kais.
                 10. Mujahid.
                 Both Sons of late Ajijur        Rahman, Resident of Village
                 Kanhariya, P.S. Azam Nagar, District Katihar.
                                                       ....    .... Opposite Party/s
                 =====================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s        : Mr. Bimal Kumar, Adv.
                 For the State               : Mr. Manoj Kumar-I, APP
                 =====================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
                                            ORAL ORDER


2   16-02-2018

The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment Patna High Court CR. REV. No.667 of 2015 (2) dt.16-02-2018 2/2 dated 06.06.2015, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Katihar in Cr. Appeal Nos. 13 and 17 of 2015, whereby the judgment and order of conviction and sentence of the opposite parties under Sections 147, 323 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code has been set-aside and the opposite parties on being acquitted, have been discharged from the liabilities of their respective bail bonds.

From the perusal of the judgment impugned, it appears that the learned Appellate Court reversed the judgment of the learned Trial Court on the ground that the opposite parties were not confronted with questions with respect to the allegations against them. That apart, the learned Appellate Court has also taken into account other aspects, which, in his opinion, rendered the prosecution case doubtful.

This Court finds no good reason to interfere with the impugned judgment.

The present revision petition is misconceived and is dismissed.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Praveen-II/-

 U        T