$¥aa§5§ gami; IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUD'CATUPE AT BILASPUR a m? 80% '7" C'nmmal Rev1s1o 0 ‘g/Of 2007 Mohammad Dastglr S/o Saddlk ag6d about 3o years res1dent of Vijay Nagar, presently residing at Nagar Ramanuj Ganj, P.S. APPLICANT Ramanuj Ganj , Tahsil Pal, District Surguja (CG). VERSUS 1. Rahamat Hussain S/o Dildar aged about 60 years. 2. Yakub S/o Rahamat Hussain, agedabout 40 years. 3. Ayub S/o Rahamat Hussain, aged 34 years. 4. Firoz S/o Ibrahim , aged' about 18 years. 5. Mubarak S/o Yakub, aged about 2O years. 6. Sharif S/o Rahamat, aged about 3O years. 7. Mosowar S/o Ibrahim, aged about 21 years. 8. Ibrahim S/o Rahamat, aged about 38 years. All resident of Village Kanakpur, Thana Ramanujganj, Tahsil Pal, District Surguja (CG}. RESPONDENTS M J r”. *i MEMORANDUM OF CRIMINAL REVISION Ul S 397 READ WITH SECTIQN 4o 1"“0F Cr.P.c. 1, HIGH COURT GF CHH£WE$§ARH AT BIL£a$PUR 5§w§§g Beach 1 Han‘me Etiir“. 3‘as?§ca Prifénker {béwakw \ CrwLP N0. @86 ef 296°? '1 A??LIC:ANT Mohémmad Das‘i‘gir X’arsus RESPONDENTS Rghama’f Haggai?! (E4 ofhar‘g) Shri Sumi Tripcd‘hi, aounsel fer mg app§éccm3x CRIMINAL REVI€>IGN UNbER 5§€TEON 39? gEAD WETH 5E EO‘xi 4% i)? THE €Ri$§INAL P§G£E$URE £G3E. ti)" a D E 5%! {3&‘112’3395 Hama‘ {m gdmi55ion. The presgfi? pairiféea s dimatwd aggmf fiat: imggrmagd Judgmgn‘? da‘mi 14 2 ZQQ7 I“ suad b Agd ansi S s (3%: Euiga Ramanu‘jganj {5115.}, Sargugs, m f wra! Awe“ \‘z3 31/? W3 2 : d :2, t arising GL3? 9f “(ha gadgmgm damd 33% gaggad m Crigtgémi Casa N0. 5Q5/2Q01 by Jud'icia! Magisfmfe, Firs? Class, Ramanujganj. E31 judgmam cia‘rad Q??? Qé h ieamed Magisimie hag cam/id‘gd ihg rammégi’iig far ‘i’hg Qffame pgnismgg u ri 9; mm 9 a?” ”fiw E. 3.1,. ami Cgdg *am ggnienced fham fer Thrge maniim r‘iggmgg imgi‘igmmani and fing of Rs.1,000/- gash, whgraw i152?! aggaziia‘ia mum“ baiaw by ihe impugned judgmgg‘i‘i he- a qJ fieri i a’i/rasgnndprirs Z. As per ‘ihg ccsz 0f i‘hg campiaimni m 231.2QQ1 a compiain? case, was fiizd by "Fha appiimni aiiegning in if ma? ha 3 ihg signer of pizce Qf iami bearing Khasr‘a Na.é44 and éZ" azjmegsuring 0’29 and 01? he s a em‘we y oi vi *r‘w Kmciffur 7+ i§ aiiagpd Thai an 25.192901 ascusad Qawsara have. gamrgd Tine fizid a? ma camgiainam mid him/a {Qmibiy ”wagwé iing My “rm arcwn hv V$ k) him and fhergaf‘é'er “they hwe mi? cmiy caused fha §Q$s 07f Rs.5,000/— bu‘r haw dsa commi'rmd we, Qf‘fenca cf Thaf? 9f “n2 said Grog). .3, In suppem‘ 9f H‘s casg, we wmpigimmf has axamingd 5:5 many as 5 w§fnesse3. S‘m‘ra‘mgms 9f fiag respgn§en?s/accu3e& wgre alga rgcgrdgd wig? Sac?%9n 3:3 m? i‘rhe Cgdg Q‘f {Jrimimd Pracedure 3n which Thgy have denigd The charges lavelgd ggains’r ”mam and pleaded Their inncgenae and false impiicg’rmn in z‘hg cgsa Fgur dg‘fgncg wifngsses wgrg giso gxamined by tha gccgsgd persons‘ 4a By fhe Judgmam damé 3.2,2QQé karmd Mggisfrmfg has convicfed The accused pemans wheraas vide impugned judgmen‘r daTed 14.2.2007 in an appeal preferred by Tha accused pemoms, order of iearned Mggisfrm‘a has bgen r‘gvgrsgd and “me. {imaged persons hava bean acqui'?’red. 5. Camem‘ian 9f fhe counse§ far fhe; applicam‘ is mm “Hm iearned aspabw coum“ hag erred in law in reversing weii reascned J‘Ljdgmenf of The Triad Cour? and fhere is engugh maferia! evaéieb!e an record cm whmh basis ’rhe ccnvic‘rion e’f The accused persens eugh‘r Te have been main’rained by the appeilg’re Cgurt. é. l hgve heard. ceunse! for The applieem eyed perused a‘he material available cm. recerd. 7. Frem The evidence as adduceri by the complainam, if is clear iha‘r he has failed To esiablish lhe faci Thai he was cwner and in passeseion of ihe land in queelienl No documeni whai'seever hae been filed by ihe campiainan‘i shewing ihe cwnership or his possession aver ihe land; in dispui’e. Qne of lhe wiinesses of the cemplainanf namalv $a‘rmmyan Singh {CW-3} haw admif‘md ‘?ha fac? “rm“? $ome civil dispm‘a is‘ agndirzg ’{kemaw War: camp—mimrxf and The accuszd persons regczi"déng ‘ihe gamd V augs’rian and ’rha Eand in quas‘tian bebngs “m (me. §2ammgf Hgsgin (accused/respondan? No.1); Ht has {Lnhew smmd Tm? he had Qidyv Frcm 'mg evideme i? aka: ampears ‘3’}‘xa‘r 9am 21a? Hwmm (accused/respandenf No‘l) had purchaszd fha said. Qand from mofhar of The comphimm? an 30,1Za196Q by a ragis‘rer‘ed mEg— :iaed. in fam‘ mas? of Jrhe wimgssgs 0f Tha campiqimn? havz admmgd The fag? 1‘hcn.‘ on accoun’r of iand in quesTion, di$pme i$ panding bafween "the. wriigs. §Pmm we reccmj/ if am asapgars Thar “mare is material cammdimon in fhe sfcn‘eman’; 0f :fha complaingm's wifne5$ea Defense wh‘nassgg examingd by #he accused parsans esmbHshes The fad frhm some dispuig is panding befwgen'mg parties and *rhe mmi in ques‘mm i3 no? ownzd and pggseSSed by the wmglgingnt AH These. aspgcfs haw been (My considgreé by Tha cwm‘ bamw whiig passing ‘mg impugned judgmen? 9f cmquiTmL 3 r 8. Affar hearing cgunse! far fhe pam‘igs and going Thmugh The evidencg availabig an recgrd and bging vary mnch canscicus gf Thg existing iagai pasiiign Thai in a casa gigging? acquiiml if "mic viaws ara-‘possibie on The basis sf the evidence isd by tine ti pmsecu‘ricn and ihe iris! Csuri Taking ans visw iaysum'sis is ins g accused, reversisn sf ihe findings sf acquifmi by The sppsiia‘iey Ceur‘i inking ihe oiher passibie View info considera‘risn, is no? psr‘missibie in ms, this Caur‘i is of the visw ihcn‘ ins judgment impugned acqui‘iiing ins respcndenfs /sccuszd of ine— affenczi punishabie under Secfion under Seciicn 3?9 of ins Endian Pena? i @ Cade, is jum‘ and {Jr-age!” and does nm‘ fhis Court, 91 Fm“ The reasans afargmgnfiongd, Theme is no mgrh‘ in frhe preSem‘ casg and fhe samg is dismissed gccordingi. caii for any interference by y