LAXMAN SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No.2.

(2.) The present Cr. Revision Application has been filed against the order dtd. 4/1/2016 passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Nakatiaganj in Case No. 1314 of 2012, by which, proceeding under Sec. 145 of Cr.P.C. has been decided in favour of first party/opposite party No.2.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the contents of order sheet, it transpires that both the parties have submitted their pleadings on record as well as adduced their evidences, first party adduced six evidences and second party adduced four evidences. It also transpires from the record that examination, cross-examination and documents were also produced from the parties but the trial court prior to deciding the case in favour of anyone, has not discussed a single oral witness in this case. Such type of finding is absolutely perverse and without application of mind.