THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1995 of 2010 JUDGMENT: The petitioner filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. against six persons alleging the offences punishable under Sections 188, 447, 379, 352, 506, 213, 427, 403, 109 read with 34 IPC. The Court below after following the procedure i.e., recording the sworn statement of complainant, etc., took the case on file against Accused Nos.1 to 5 and dismissed the said complaint insofar as Accused No.6-Sub-Inspector of Police, Dachepalli Police Station is concerned under Section 203 Cr.P.C. The same is questioned in this Criminal Revision Case. Heard both sides. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on either side, this Court is totally in agreement with the impugned order passed by the Court below. The entire case as per the complaint allegations filed by the petitioner herein is only against Accused Nos.1 to 5 and the Sub-Inspector of Police who is shown as Accused No.6 as supported them in committing the said offence. If it is a fact that accused No.6 had supported the other accused in committing the said offences, the petitioner should come forward with specific allegations against the respondent-Accused No.6. It appears there is no whisper about the time and date of offence when the said accused i.e., respondent herein criminally trespassed into the land of the complainant and got plucked the mirchi crop either in the private complaint or in the sworn statement and his witnesses. In those circumstances, the Court below is justified in passing the impugned order. Accordingly I see no merits in the Criminal Revision Case and the same is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 14th February 2011 DR