Abhinav Kumar vs State Of Bihar Through Principal Secretary And Ors

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

This Special Leave to Appeal, under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed on behalf of the appellant, seeking leave to file appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 26.02.2018 passed in complaint case bearing C.R. No.233 of 2014/Trial No.470 of 2018, whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dalsingsarai, Samastipur, acquitted the respondent nos.2 to 6 of the charges framed against them under Sections 379 and 327 of the Indian Penal Code.

The fact leading to this Special Leave to Appeal is that the appellant filed the aforesaid complaint case bearing C.R. No.233 of 2014 with the allegation that on 18.05.2014 at about 10.00 A.M., he was present at Plot No.3886 of Khata No.404, measuring an area of 10 Katha 11 Dhurs land, situated at Mauza-Harpur Simri, and was getting the maize crops collected by the labourers. At that time, the respondent nos.2 to 6 having lathi, bhala and sack came there and forcibly took away the maize crop, putting the same in the sack. When the appellant made protest, then all abused and caused assault to him. The weight of the maize crop was about 10 quintals.

In course of trial, the prosecution examined, altogether, four witnesses and also got exhibited certain documents.

From perusal of the impugned Judgment and Order, it appears that the complainant/appellant Yogendra Mistri was examined as P.W.1 and he has clearly admitted in his cross- examination that Mahendra Mistri (respondent no.2) and Brijnandan Mistri are his own brothers and his father died leaving behind him two Bighas land and the said land was not in partition in between him and his brothers and the cultivation over the said land was being done jointly and they used to divide the crop equally.

The learned Judicial Magistrate, Dalsingsarai, Samastipur, has discussed the evidence and the materials, available on the record, in the impugned Judgment and Order and arrived at the conclusion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the case against the respondent nos.2 to 6 and, accordingly, acquitted them of the charges framed against them under Sections 379 and 327 of the Indian Penal Code.

I find no illegality and infirmity in the impugned Judgment and Order for interference with the same and, accordingly, this Special Leave to Appeal is dismissed.