THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1936 OF 2003 ORDER: 1 The petitioner, who was examined as P.W.1, gave report to the Station House Officer, Moghalpura P.S. stating that he (the petitioner) and his brother have three shops bearing No.23-6-276/1 to 3 on the back side of Mirka Daira. As the well situated towards Southern side of their shops, they intended to dismantle the same and on 26.01.2002 at 3.45 PM while they were dismantling the said well, the accused 1 to 3 objected for the same and then an altercation took place. In that altercation A.1 hit with an iron rod on the head of the petitioner due to which he sustained bleeding injuries. Accused 2 & 3 also hit the petitioner with sticks on his body. In that connection Cr.No.12 of 2002 was registered and after investigation the police filed the charge sheet. The same was taken on file as C.C.No.565 of 2002 by the court below for the offences punishable under sections 324 r/w 34 of IPC. 2 During the course of trial the prosecution examined 5 witnesses as P.w.1 to 5 and got exhibited Ex.P.1 to P.6 and M.O.1. The court below having assessed the entire evidence, came to the conclusion that the prosecution has miserably failed to bring home the guilt of the accused and accordingly acquitted them of the said offences. As against the said judgment dated 30.09.2003, since the State has not chosen to file any appeal, the de facto complainant who was examined as P.W1 in the said case has filed this revision. 3 Heard. 4 Having gone through the entire material available on record, this court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case for interference. There are so many contradictions in the evidence of P.W.1 himself. From the material available on record it is clear that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused for the alleged offences and accordingly the court below, having gone through all the material aspects, has rightly acquitted the respondents/accused. 5 Further, this is a revision against acquittal preferred under sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C under which the jurisdiction of this court is very limited. It is only when any material irregularity has been committed by the court below, this court will interfere and that too this court at best can remand the matter to the court below for fresh disposal. But it cannot give any altogether different finding. 6 Accordingly this revision is dismissed. -------------- 09.11.2010 Kvsn