HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA. ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 123 OF 2006. DATED 19TH APRIL, 2010. BETWEEN Syed Shah Saheb Peer Hussain Chirthi Jagirdar ……Petitioner/ P.W.3 and The State, rep. By S.I. of Police, Kowthalam P.S., Kurnool District, Rep. By Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP, Hyderabad, and, ors. ….Respondents/Complainants. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA. ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 123 OF 2006. ORDER: 1. This Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 and 402 of Cr.P.C. is ﬁled against the order dated 8.12.2003 passed in C.C.No. 574 of 2002, whereunder and whereby, the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Adoni, acquitted the accused of the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC. 2. The facts in brief are that on 10.6.2002 at 4.00 PM when one Thimmapuram Narayana Reddy was going to Khaderlinga Darga, the accused induced him to believe that the planets are not in his favour and he is with ‘Graha dosha’ and advised him to purchase Thalisman (Tayat) from him for Rs.100/- Believing the same, the said T.Narayana Reddy purchased the Tayat from the accused and tied the same to his hand. However, he observed no improvement in health condition of his family members and came to know that the accused cheated him. So also, in the same way, the accused cheated another person, by name Syed Shalum Pylvan on 11.6.2002. Hence, Both T.Narayana Reddy and Syed Shalum Pylvan gave complaint to the Sub Inspector of Police, Kowthalam Police Station, who registered the case and investigated into. 3. To substantiate the charge levelled against the accused, the prosecution examined P.Ws. 1 to 5 and marked Exs.P. 1 to P.3 besides marking Exs.D.1 and D2 and M.Os. 1 and 2. On concluding the trial, the learned Magistrate found the accused not guilty of the oﬀence punishable under Section 420 IPC and acquitted him. 4. Aggrieved by the same, the present Criminal Revision Case is filed. 5. Heard both sides. 6. The learned Magistrate after examining the witnesses decided the issue against the petitioner herein and acquitted the accused of all the charges. The main grounds of acquittal are that there is inordinate delay in lodging the complaint and the facts of the case do not disclose the offence under Section 420 IPC. 7. Admittedly, the complaint given by the petitioner herein discloses that the accused/2nd respondent herein induced the complainant that his life will be improved if he purchased ‘Tayat’ from him for Rs. 100/- and also informed that the planets are not in favour and it is necessary for him to purchase the same and to tie on his hand. Interestingly, the petitioner herein lodged a complaint that there is no improvement in his life after purchasing the Tayat from the accused. 8. This Court perused the record, evidence adduced by the parties and also the order passed by the Court below. 9. The case arises out of the false beliefs among the public that the path of the persons can be changed by way of doing these types of ‘Poojas’, tying ‘Tayats’, wearing various types of stones, scarifying valuables to Poojaries etc.,. However, in this case, it is to be seen that the second respondent herein cannot be said to be acted intending to cheat the petitioner herein. The same can be presumed that when the petitioner herein has belief that on tying the Tayat, change in his life would come; the same belief and idea maybe in the mind of the person who promised that the said Tayat will change the life of the petitioner herein. The entire episode is, since because of the baseless, unbelievable, superstitious, false and unreasonable faith towards these types of Mantras and other rituals. Hence, the order of the lower Court acquitting the accused cannot be interfered with. It is also well settled proposition that when the evidence discloses that two views are possible, one of which favourable can be given to the accused. In this case, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused on the said proposition. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the order of the learned trial Judge. 10. The Criminal Revision Case is liable to be dismissed and accordingly the same is dismissed. ------------------------------------- JUSTICE RAJA. ELANGO DATE: 19T H APRIL, 2010. Msnr.