THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.830 OF 2002 Dated:02.06.2010 Between: Shaik Noorjahan .. Petitioner And Shaik Noor Mohammad and others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.830 OF 2002 ORDER: On the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner herein, the Sub Inspector of Police, Gorantala Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.45 of 1997 against respondent Nos.1 to 5. After investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the respondents for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. During the course of trial, the complainant was examined as PW.1 and some more witnesses were examined as PWs.2 to 12. The prosecution also got marked Exs.P1 to P8. On an analysis of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hindupur, came to the conclusion that the offences are not made out and accordingly by his judgment dated 02.08.2000 acquitted the respondents. As against the said judgment, the State i.e., the Sub Inspector of Police, Gorantla Police Station, did not file any appeal and hence the complainant i.e., PW.1 filed this revision invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Sections 397, 399 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Heard. It is true that against an acquittal, the State has to prefer an appeal and when the State does not file any appeal, it is always left open to the aggrieved person i.e., the complainant to approach this Court and file a revision as provided for under Sections 397, 399 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. But the scope of this Court in a revision of this nature is very limited. Even if this Court comes to the conclusion that the said sentence is erroneous, the maximum that can be done is to remand the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law and this Court has no power to set aside the said judgment and impose punishment as if the accused has committed the said offences. As the alleged offences had taken place prior to May 1997, this Court is of the view that it may not be desirable to entertain this revision at this length of time i.e., after 13 years. In the light of the above discussion, this Court is of the view that this Criminal Revision Case deserves no consideration and the same is likely to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. ____________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 02.06.2010 KH