1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Criminal Revision Nos. 198,199, 200,201,202, 203 and 205 of 2011. Date of decision: 02.12.2011. 1. Cr. Revision No. 198 of 2011. Dharam Chand. ......Petitioner. Versus State of H.P.& Anr. ......Respondents. 2. Cr. Revision No. 199 of 2011. Dharam Chand. ......Petitioner. Versus State of H.P.& Ors. ......Respondents. 3. Cr. Revision No. 200 of 2011. Dharam Chand. ......Petitioner. Versus State of H.P.& Ors. ......Respondents. 4. Cr. Revision No. 201 of 2011. Dharam Chand. ......Petitioner. Versus State of H.P.& Ors. ......Respondents. 5. Cr. Revision No. 202 of 2011. Dharam Chand. ......Petitioner. Versus State of H.P.& Ors. ......Respondents. 6. Cr. Revision No. 203 of 2011. Dharam Chand. ......Petitioner. Versus State of H.P.& Anr. ......Respondents. 2 7. Cr. Revision No. 205 of 2011. Dharam Chand. ......Petitioner. Versus State of H.P.& Ors. ......Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No For the Petitioner(s) : Mr.Sanjeev Kuthiala, Advocate. ( in all the petitions). For the Respondent (s) : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl.A.G. with Mr. J.S.Rana, Asstt. A.G. for respondent No. 1. ( in all the petitions). Kuldip Singh , Judge( Oral). This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Revision Nos.198,199, 200,201,202,203 and 205 of 2011 as common question of law is involved in all the revisions. These revisions have been directed against the order dated 22.06.2011 passed by Special Judge, Mandi. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Special Judge has erred in discharging Sudhur Chand, Dalip Singh, Narender Kumar, Harish Kumar, Rajiv Sood, Ram Singh, Shakhi Ram and Rakesh Kumar Chauhan. It has been submitted that Sudhur Chand, Dalip Singh, Narender Kumar, Harish Kumar, Rajiv Sood, Ram Singh, Shakhi Ram and Rakesh Kumar Chauhan are co-accused with the petitioner in the case. 2. I have perused the reports under Section 173 Cr.P.C. In the said reports, Dharam Chand and Anil Kumar Sanyal have been named as 1 Whether reporters of Local Pa pers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? Yes 3 accused, whereas Sudhur Chand , Dalip Singh, Narender Kumar, Harish Kumar, Rajiv Sood, Ram Singh, Shakhi Ram and Rakesh Kumar Chauhan have been shown in column 12 which column is meant for particulars of accused persons not charge-sheeted (suspect). In the reports under Section 173 Cr.P.C filed in the Court below, Sudhur Chand , Dalip Singh, Narender Kumar, Harish Kumar, Rajiv Sood, Ram Singh, Shakhi Ram and Rakesh Kumar Chauhan have not been named as accused, but as suspects only. No doubt, the Special Judge, Mandi, has used expression discharged for Sudhur Chand, Dalip Singh, Narender Kumar, Harish Kumar, Rajiv Sood, Ram Singh, Shakhi Ram and Rakesh Kumar Chauhan. Once Sudhur Chand, Dalip Singh, Narender Kumar, Harish Kumar, Rajiv Sood, Ram Singh, Shakhi Ram and Rakesh Kumar Chauhan are not accused in the reports under Section 173 Cr.P.C., there is no question of their discharge by the Special Judge vide order dated 22.06.2011. The petitioner cannot be said to be aggrieved by the order dated 22.06.2011 with respect to Sudhur Chand , Dalip Singh, Narender Kumar, Harish Kumar, Rajiv Sood, Ram Singh, Shakhi Ram and Rakesh Kumar Chauhan. The petitioner has not challenged the orders dated 22.06.2011 for proceeding against him. There is no merit in the revisions which are dismissed. The pending application (s) are also disposed of in view of disposal of main petitions. Record of Court below be sent back if not required, in any, other connected cases. ( Kuldip Singh ), Judge. December 2, 2011. (Krt)