1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R Triloka Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. S.B.CR. REVISION PETITION NO.1088/2006 DATE OF ORDER :: July 18, 2007 PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr.Mridul Jain, for the petitioner. Mr.Ashok Upadhyaya, P.P. BY THE COURT: By the instant criminal revision petition under section 397/401 Cr.P.C., the petitioner-complainant has challenged the order dt. 6.4.2005 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner (for short `the trial court' hereinafter) whereby the trial court acquitted the accused-respondents Balu Ram and Fusa Ram. This is a revision petition filed by the complainant. State of Rajasthan was a party before the trial court prosecuting the case, however the State has not filed any leave to appeal or 2 appeal before this Court. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor for the State. I have carefully gone through the judgment and order impugned. The star witness PW.3 Aduram, brother of victim Parmeshwari clearly stated that he was tutored to make a statement as stated by the petitioner. The petitioner himself did not say that any Panchayat for the occurrence was called and a specific question was put to him whether the Panchayat was called, he categorically denied, whereas PW.1 Parmeshwari stated that a Panchayat was held. The trial court finding the infirmity in the prosecution case, acquitted the accused- respondents by extending benefit of doubt. In my view, it is not a fit case warranting interference that too on a revision by the complainant. The revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. [H.R.PANWAR],J. m.asif/-