Patna High CourtCR. REV./346/2003dismissed

Md. Dilren v. State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-01-28Justice Smt. Anjana Prakash2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.346 of 2003 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- MADHEPURA =========================================================== Md. Dilren, son of late Sheikh Md. Ayub, r/o village- Garihia, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar,

2. Md. Imteyaz, son of Md. Haroon,

3. Mumtaz, son of Md. Haroon,

4. Nazrul, son of Md. Haroon,

5. Mehieuddin, son of Gulzar,

6. Halima Khatoon, wife of Mohiuddin,

7. Saleema Khatoon alias Sameena, daughter of Md. Haroon,

8. Sanjira Khatoon, daughter of Md. Haroon,

9. Reena, daughter of Md. Haroon,

10. Rajina Khatoon, daughter of Md. Haroon,

11. Najibul, son of Md. Haroon &

12. Md. Haroon, son of Tafazzul, all are resident of village- Garihia, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Md. Soban Asghar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : APP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-01-2015

1. This appeal as against the Opposite Party Nos. 2 to 12 has already been dismissed in default for non compliance of the order dated 26.08.2004.

2. The Petitioner is aggrieved with the judgment of acquittal of the Opposite Party No.2 to 12 by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Madhubani, in Sessions Trial No.176 of 2000 by judgment dated 26.03.2003.

3. The case of the Informant was that on the date of

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.346 of 2003 dt.28-01-2015 2/2 occurrence some dispute arose with regard to distribution of Prasad which led to abuse, altercation and assault.

4. Charges were framed under Section 302/149 and other minor Sections of the Indian Penal Code against the Accused persons.

5. During trial, the Informant did not appear and it was for this reason that the Opposite Party Nos. 2 to 12 were acquitted of all charges.

6. I see no reason to interfere in the matter.

7. The application is dismissed.

(Anjana Prakash, J) JA/- U T