1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICTURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. O R D E R Kanhiya Lal. Versus State of Rajasthan. S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.512/2007 ... Date of Order: July 20, 2007 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR Mr. Sanjay Mathur, for the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Upadhyaya, Public Prosecutor for the State. BY THE COURT: By the instant criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 5-1-2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Railmagra, district Rajsamand (for short, “the trial Court” hereinafter), whereby the trial Court acquitted respondents No. 2 to 10. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the impugned judgment and order. I have also gone through the statements of prosecution witnesses submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The prosecution failed to establish the injuries caused to the petitioner. Even the petitioner also did not state as to which of the accused caused which of the injury on which part of 2 his body. The trial Court, on appreciation of the evidence came to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the respondents No.2 to 10 beyond reasonable doubt and, therefore, acquitted them by giving them the benefit of doubt. In my view, the conclusion arrived at by the trial Court cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse warranting interference in the revisional jurisdiction of this Court and that too on a revision petition filed by the complainant. It is settled law that the order of acquittal cannot be converted into that of conviction on a revision petition. In this view of the matter, no case for interference is made out. The criminal revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs