[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT S.B. CRIMINAL LEAVE TO APPEAL NO. 247/2008 MUNICIPAL BOARD, KISHANGARH Vs. MOHAN LAL & ANR. Date: 04.08.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE None present for the appellant. Mr. B.S. Chhaba, Public Prosecutor for the State. **** None appeared on behalf of the appellant even in second round. The present criminal leave to appeal under Section 378(iii) Cr.P.C. is preferred by the appellant Municipal Board, Kishangarh through its Executive Officer against the judgment dated 22.12.2007 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarh, Ajmer in Criminal Case No. 96/2001 (369/2000), whereby the accused-respondent Mohan Lal has been acquitted from the offence under Section 203(1)(2) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act giving benefit of doubt. Brief facts of the case are that the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Kishangarh sent a written report dated 01.04.2000 to the SHO, Madanganj to the effect that the accused has encroached on the public land in Ward No. 26, Shivaji Nagar, Madanganj. He constructed a kitchen, two rooms and also made encroachment over the land [2] by wire fencing. Thus, the accused-respondent has committed an offence under Section 203 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act of 1959'). In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as 8 witnesses and got exhibited 8 documents marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P8. It is contended that the complainant-appellant is fully able to prove that there is clear violation of the provisions of Section 203(15) of the Act of 1959, but the trial Court acquitted the accused- respondent from the offence under Section 203(1)(2) of the Act of 1959, which is contrary to the material available on the record. I have considered the averments made in the leave to appeal and carefully gone through the impugned judgment dated 22.12.2007 passed by the trial Court. PW1 Tarachand, in his examination-in- chief, is not able to prove that the accused- respondent has encroached over the Government land. In his cross-examination, PW4 Omprakash Jamadar also not able to prove the fact regarding encroachment. Similarly PW5 Kishan Gopal is also not able to prove the fact. Further PW8, Omprakash, the Investigating Officer, prepared site plan Ex.P6 in which he failed to mention the width of the public way and also failed to establish the fact that any part of the public way has been encroached [3] by the accused-respondent. Thus, the prosecution as well as the complainant utterly failed to prove the guilt against the accused-respondent for the offence under section 203(1)(2) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act and the accused-respondent has rightly been acquitted from the aforesaid offence vide impugned judgment dated 22.12.2007 giving benefit of doubt. This Court do not find any illegality or error in the impugned judgment dated 22.12.2007 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarh, District Ajmer and the same requires no interference by this Court. Consequently, the criminal leave to appeal fails being devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/