IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT DEVI LAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. SB Criminal Revision Pet. No. 145 OF 2004 under Section 397 read with section 401 Cr.P.C. against the order dated January 23, 2004 of Judicial Magistrate Hindaun City, Distt. Karauli in Criminal Case No. 72 of 2003 by which the accused respondents 2 and 3 were acquitted of the offence under sections 447 read with section 34 IPC. Date of Order : January 29, 2009 PRESENT HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, for the petitioner. Mr. O.P.Sharma for Mr. Anurag Sharma , for the non- petitioners 2 and 3. Mr. Ganesh Meena, Public Prosecutor. BY THE COURT : This revision petition has been filed by Devi Lal complainant petitioner against the order dated January 23, 2004 of Judicial Magistrate Hindaun City, Distt. Karauli in Criminal Case No. 72 of 2003 by which the accused respondents 2 and 3 were acquitted of the charge for the offence under sections 447 read with section 34 IPC. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant petitioner is owner of Khasra No. 519 measuring .33 acre which is situated in village Vijayapura, Tehsil Hindaucity. On April 4, 2003 complainant found that the accused respondents 2 and 3 were cutting standing crops which were sowed by him. The complainant made efforts to restrain them from cutting crop, but the accused respondents threatened him for dire consequences and also used filthy language against him alongwith Jaswant Singh and Satvant Singh. The complainant lodged FIR at Police Station Suroth on april 5, 2003. The police registered FIR bearing No. 80 of 2003 for the offence under sections 447, 379, 504 and 506 IPC. During investigation the police recorded the statements of number of witnesses and also prepared site plan and collected revenue records with respect to the land bearing Khasra No. 519. After investigation it was found that the accused respondents were guilty for the offence under section 447 IPC read with section 34 IPC, the police filed challan before the Judicial Magistrate of the aforesaid sections. The trial court took cognizance against the accused respondents for the offence under sections 447 read with section 34 IPC. After recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses, the statements accused respondents under section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused respondents 2 himself appeared as witness DW.1 and cited another witness namely Mishrilal in his defence. After hearing the arguments the trial court acquitted the accuse respondents 2 and 3 of the charge under sections 447 and 34 IPC. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid order dated January 23, 2004 this revision petition has been filed. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant petitioner contended that the trial court has not appreciated the statement of the prosecution witnesses. The trial court has given a finding which affects civil rights of the complainant petitioner. He has further requested that this court may specifically give an opion regarding the judgment of the trial court that the same will not affect the civil right of the complainant petitioner. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the accused respondents Mr. O.P. Sharma and Mr. Ganesh Meena, Public Prosecutor opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the complainant. 5. For these reasons I dismiss the revision but at the same time I direct that the observations made by the trial court regarding the land in dispute which affects the civil rights of the accused respondents shall not be taken into consideration in the civil matter. Hence this revision petition is disposed. (Mahesh Chandra Sharma) J. OPPareek/