EKADASI MALLIK Vs. BABAJI MALLIK AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision has been filed by the informant private party against the order of acquittal dated 18-11-1991 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kandrapara in S.T.No. 188/90/13/91 arising out of G. R. Case No. 965 of 1989.

(2.) The submission of the learned counsel for the informant petitioner is that the lower court should have convicted the accused on the strength of appreciating the evidence of the eye-witness and erred in acquitting the accused, on ground mentioned, it has led to the miscarriage of justice. It is a fit case where this Court should interfere and set aside the order of acquittal. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the principles laid down by this Court in (1992) 5 OCR 93 (Sama Mallik Vs. Gurubari Mallik) and also 72 (1991) CLT 738 (Geaudhar, Rout Vs. State of Orissa) and 77 (1994) CLT 255 (Muralidhar Ors. Vs. Ganga Sen) and other similar decisions.

(3.) The learned counsel for the opposite parties have vehemently opposed the submissions made by the petitioner and has placed reliance on the principles laid down by the Apex Court in AIR 1951 SC 196 (O. Stephens Vs. Eqaihalla) and also AIR 1951 SC 316 (Logendranath Jh. Vs. Shri Pelal Lal Biswal) , AIR 1962 SC 1785 (K. Chinnaswamy Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh) and also in AIR 1986 SC 1721 (Gansilal Vs. Laxman Singh) . Their further submission is that the trial court had rightly acquitted the accused after appreciation of evidence. Not only that the trial court has given reasons for coming to the conclusion and acquitting the accused.