IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Revision No.1684 of 2010 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : JULY 7, 2011 HARBHAGWAN ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. SS Godara, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) 1 This revision petition has been preferred against order dated 11.2.2009, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad. 2 Respondent No.2 was charged for commission of offences under Sections 452, 323, 506, 506, Indian Penal Code. The incident took place on 31.7.2003. FIR in this regard was lodged on 4.8.2003. Independent witnesses were not joined to corroborate the case of the complainant. It has further come on the record that the complainant had filed a case to recover some amount from the accused, therefore, it has been held that false implication cannot be ruled out. 3 The two witnesses examined by the prosecution are interested witnesses and, therefore, I find no fault in the finding Criminal Revision No.1684 of 2010 (O&M) 2 of acquittal recorded by the trial Magistrate. 4 No ground for interference in revisional jurisdiction is made out. 5 The petition is dismissed. July 7, 2011 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?