- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the informant appellant and learned counsel for the State.
(2.) The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned Judgment dated 19.03.2013, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Koderma, in S.T. No.152 of 2005, whereby the private respondent Nos. 2 to 5, who were facing the trial for the offences under Sections 323 , 342 , 325 , 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, have been found not guilty and acquitted of the charges under Sections 307 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code. These respondents however, were convicted for the offences under Sections 323 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code and Respondent No. 2 Rameshwar Mehta was also convicted for the offence under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant is also aggrieved by the Order of sentence dated 19.03.2013, passed by the Court below, whereby the respondents were given the benefits of Probation of Offenders Act , and no sentence of imprisonment was passed against them.
(3.) This appeal against such acquittal has been filed after an inordinate delay of 1208 days, i.e., more than three years and three months, and in the interlocutory application (I.A. No. 2471 of 2017), filed for condonation of this delay, it is only stated that though the accused persons were acquitted on 19.03.2013, but there was again a quarrel between the accused persons and the appellant in the year 2016, when the informant appellant learnt about the acquittal of the accused persons.;