- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State as also learned counsel for the opposite parties.
(2.) THE informant petitioner is aggrieved by the Judgment dated 23.09.2003 passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih, in Sessions Trial No.176 of 1994, whereby the accused opposite parties Nos. 2 to 5 have been acquitted after trial.
(3.) THE impugned Judgment shows that the accused persons were put to trial for the offences under Sections 436/34, 427 and 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code and the accused Yugal Kishore was also put to trial for the offence under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the prosecution case, the informant Anil Kumar Rajhans, who is the petitioner in this case, was working as Godown In -charge in F.C.I., Sariya, and on the date of occurrence, i.e. 22.7.1990, he was at the railway station Sariya, inspecting the loading of sugar and wheat. At about 7.00 PM, an employee Arbind Singh, came running and informed the informant that fire was broken in Godown No. "C". At the time, the accused persons, being the employees of the FCI, were at the godown. It is alleged that in the godown, about 5846 bags of sugar, 40 bags sugar suping and 375 empty bags were there, and the godown was gutted in fire. The FIR was lodged and the employees present at the godown have been made accused. The accused persons were ultimately put to trial and it appears from the impugned Judgment that in course of trial, 13 witnesses were examined by the prosecution, including the informant Anil Kumar Rajhans as PW 1. In spite of several opportunities granted by the Court, no further prosecution witness was examined and the prosecution evidence was closed on 21.7.2003 and the statement of the accused persons were recorded. The impugned Judgment clearly shows that none of the prosecution witnesses, including the informant, have stated that they had seen any person setting the godown on fire, nor have they stated anything as to whether the godown was put to fire in a preplanned manner, rather the accused persons were implicated only on suspicion. Similarly, there is no evidence about any misappropriation of the sugar or any money by any accused. Rather, it is a case, in which the cause of the fire in the godown was not known at all. Accordingly, all the accused persons were acquitted of the charge. The informant has filed this application aggrieved by the said Judgment.;