[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1100/2006 GIRRAJ PRASAD Vs. CHHOTELAL & ORS. DATE: 02.04.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Ms. Sangeeta Sharma for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Chhaba, Public Prosecutor for the State. Mr. Pankaj Gupta for the respondents. **** The present criminal revision petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 06.06.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bandikui, District Dausa in Criminal Revision Petition No. 60/2005, whereby the Revisional Court after setting aside the order dated 12.07.2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Bandikui, by which cognizance for the offences under Sections 143, 323/149, 365/149 and 384/149 IPC was taken against the respondent Nos. 1 to 7, remanded the matter back to the trial Court for deciding the same afresh after considering the final report submitted by the police. The main challenge to the order impugned passed by the Revisional Court dated 06.06.2006 is on the ground that the trial Court after considering each and every aspect and after prima- facie satisfying, had taken cognizance against the [2] accused-respondents for the offences under Sections 143, 323/149, 365/149 and 384/149 IPC vide order dated 12.07.2005, but the Revisional Court while setting aside the order of the trial Court dated 12.07.2005, remanded the matter back to the trial Court only on the ground that final report submitted by the police has not been properly considered and dealt with by the trial Court. Having heard rival submissions of the respective parties and upon careful perusal of the order impugned dated 06.06.2006 passed by the Revisional Court as well as the order of the trial Court dated 12.07.2005, it is no doubt that the Revisional Court while remanding the matter back to the trial Court for fresh adjudication, has observed that the trial Court has not properly considered the final report submitted by the police. Be that as it may, looking to the apprehension of the petitioner that the trial Court will be prejudiced with the observations made by the Revisional Court, it is expected from the trial Court to decide the matter afresh as per the material available on record without influencing with the observations made by the Revisional Court vide impugned order dated 06.06.2006. [3] With these observations, this Court do not find any merit in the instant criminal revision petition and the same fails and is hereby dismissed. Record be sent back forthwith. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/