Gulabchand Prasad v. The State Of Bihar Through Principal Secretary Land Reform Department Govt. Of Bihar Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

SLA No.25 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-325 Year-2008 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== GULABCHAND PRASAD Son of Late Jageshwar Mahto Resident of Village - Gwasa Sheikhpura, P.S.- Pandarak, District- Patna. ... ... Appellant.

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY LAND REFORM DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2.

The Land Acquisition Officer, Patna, P.S. and District - Patna. 3.

Senapati Mahto Son of Late Ram Swarup Mahto Resident of Village - Gwasa Sheikhpura Nayadih, P.S.- Pandarak, District- Patna ... ... Respondents.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant :

Dr. Anjani Pd. Singh, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 29-08-2019 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 07.03.2019 passed in Complaint Case No.325 of 2008/Trial No.856 of 2016, whereby and whereunder the court of Sri Manoj Kumar-VII, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Barh, Patna, acquitted the respondent no.3 Senapati Mahto of the charges framed against him for the offence under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned

Patna High Court SLA No.25 of 2019 dt.29-08-2019 2/2 Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and also perused the impugned Judgment.

3. From perusal of the impugned Judgment, it appears that the Judicial Magistrate discussed the oral and documentary evidence, as adduced by the complainant/appellant, in detail and came to the conclusion that the complainant/appellant has not been able to prove the charges framed against the respondent no.3 for the offence under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code and, accordingly, acquitted the respondent no.3 of the charges framed against him under the aforesaid Sections.

4. I find no reason to interfere with the impugned Judgment and Order and to entertain this Special Leave to Appeal.

5. Accordingly, this Special Leave to Appeal stands dismissed.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Pradeep Srivastava/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 30.08.2019.

Transmission Date 30.08.2019.