C@ HIGH COURT GF CHHATTISGARH AT BELASPUR Coram : Hen’ble Shri DiHp Raosaheb Deshmukh and Hon’ble $hri Raieshwar wanwar, JJ. Cr. Revision No. 24912606 Budhram Agrawal, aged abaut 50 years, son 0f Late Shri Kedar Nath Agrawai, Oqcupation — Agriculture, Resident 9f villa’ge Kudekela, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (CG) Appiicant u f Versus Non-applican' ‘ 1) LakhanlaL Sla tate Harual, aged about 23 years, 2) Munna Ram, SID late Harual, aged about 35 years, 3) Bharat Singh, Sic late Harilal, aged about 29 years, All residents of viuage Purunga, Thana— Chhaal, District - Raigarh (CG) 4) The State of Chhattisgarh, through S.H.O. Thana Chhaal, District w- Raigarh (ca) CRIMINAL REVISION UNDER SECTION 3971401 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ¢ODE Present : Applicant by Shri S.K.Tiwari, Advocate. Non-applicant No.4/Stete by Shri Bhasker Payashi; P.L. ORAL ORnER (Passed on 21g: July, 2009} The following oral order of the Court was delivered by Dilip Raesaheb Eeshmukh, J. Heard on admission. 2. This criminal revision is directed the judgment dated 17.01.2006 delivered by the Judicial Magistrate First Ciass, Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh in criminal case No.219/1998 whereby non-applicants No. 1 & 2 a were acquitted of the charges under Sections 420 & 468 of the l.P.C. ‘ while non-applicant No.3 was acquitted of the charge under Sections 420, 467, 468, 467 and in the alternative under Section 471 of the LPC. 3. The prosecution had aileged that Hérilai, father of the non- applicants No.1 to 3 was Dhobi by caste and beionged to other backward classes. It was further arleged that he obtained a certifrcate showing him as ‘Dhoba’ by caste which belonged to ihe Scheduled Tribe category and obtained services for the non-applicants. No.1 to 3 on that basis. 4, Main accused Harilal dieq during the triat before the Judicial Magistrate First Ctass 5. Non-appheants led oral as wetl as documentary evrdence to show that they belonged to Dhoba caste which net! into the Scheduted Tribe category. Thus there was conftrct between the evrdence led by the proseoution and the defence. The evidence led by the non—applicants No.1 to 3 remained wholly unrebutted since the witnesses were not cross- examined. The prosecution Le. the State did not file any application for leave to tile any appeal against acquittal of the non-applicants No.1 to 3. 6. Having heard Shri S.K.Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant on perusal of the record, we are of considered opinion that the non-applicants No.1 to 3 were rightly given the benefit of doubt by the learned trial Judge. The acquittal of the non-applicants No.1 to 3 is well merited and does not call for any interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. 7. The revision is without merit and is accordingiy dismissed at the @ admission stage, l Sdl- ’ Sd/— xl Raosaheb Deshmukh i R.L. Jhanwar Dllrp Judge Judge