HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASFUR CRMP N0. 204/2009 Applicant/ RevislQaer/ Accused Resppndent/ Prosecution YERSUS Savitri Bai W/o Indal Lodhi aged about 42 years Occupation Agriculturc R/o ViUage Dhaaoura P.S. Saliaspiir Lohara Tahsil Kawardha Distdct Kabir-Dhain (C.G.), State of Chhattisgarh, Through its District Magistrate Kawaxdha, Distdct Kabir-Dham (C.G.). APPLICATION/PETITION UNDBR SECTION 482 OF 'niECODE OF CRIMINAL PROCBDURE. (SB :Hon?ble M».T.P.Sharma^ J.) Present:- Shri Prateek Siaha, Advocate for the applicartt. ShriAjit Singh, P.L, for fhe State/respondent ORAL- ORDBR (Passedon 24/4/2009) 1. This petition is directed agamst the order dated 6/9/2008 passed by the Learaed Sessions Judge Kabirdham, in crimmal Revision No. 64/2008 affinnmg the order dated 1/7/2008 passed by the leamed Judicial Magistrate First Class Kawardha, ux crmunal Case No, 126/2007 whercby Court below has dismissed the appUcation fUed on behatfofthe appUcaat for wifhdrawal ofthe crimmal case. 2. Order is chaUenged on the ground fbat when the case agaiast fhe inam accused has been withdrawn fhen case agauist co-accused is not mamtainable but Court below has not considered the same and fhereby conmiitted aa iUegalily resulting into niiscarriage ofjustice. 3. Shri Prateek Siaha, Advocate for the appMcaat aad Shri Ajit Siagh, P.L. for fhe State/respondent are heard. 4. Order impugned perused. Leamed counsel for the appMcant submits ffaiat two accused i,e, present appUcaat aad Naib Tahsildar Krapal Singh were faciag trial for the ofiTence punishable under Sections 420, 423, 467, 468, 120-B of fhe Indiaa Penal Code. Prosecution agaiast the public servant Le. Krapal Siagh has been wifhdrawn ia accordaace wifh Section 32 l of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Naib Tahsildar Krapal Singh was maia accused m this case aad has allotted the laad to the applicaat, After withdrawal of the prosecution agaiast fhe maui accused Krapal Singh alleged Naib Tahsildar aiiy proaecution with fhe help of charge of conspiracy is not sustamable against preseat co- accused. Leamed counsel for the appHcaat placed reliaace m the matter of State of M.P. Vs. R^jeev Jaln reported m_2001_^ M.P.H.T. S8 ia which it has held that if the case agamst fhe principal accused fails then no case is sustamable agaiast the co-accused, Perusal of tiie order ioipugned reveals that present appUcaat has filed aa application before Revenue OfBcer Le, Naib Tahsildar for the Govt. laad claiaung herself to be a deserted womaa although ia fact she is not deserted. By misrepresenting herself to be a deserted womaii, she filed aa application for aUotment of fhe laad ia her name acid obtaiciGd the said laad on lease by committmg forgery, Present appUcant is fhe maia accused and the offence punishable iinder Sections 420, 423, 467, 468 and 120-B I.P.C. is triable by the Magistrate independently, Consequently, no illegallty or irreguladty has been committed by the Court below resulting ia miscarriage of justice. I do. not find any force ia fhe petition, same is liable to be dismissed aad it is hereby disniissed. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge