HEGH COURT OF CHHATT§SGARH ;§xT 3ELASPUR DIVESEON BENCH dQRilWi: HGN’BLE SHRE RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HQN’BLE SHRE $UNIL KUMAR SINHA, .E. ‘ ‘ I Petitioner ‘ ¢ ‘ t V ‘ Respondents - 1 ‘ ’ I ‘ \ ‘ i i ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ i @ Criminal Revisinn Ne.27? of 291a Srimati Asha Sinqh W/o Rajendra Singh, MIG 2?7!_ Dveoh Khurd Bitaspm (CG) , §fER$US State of Chhatti$garh Through Coiiectcr Bi§aspur (CG) Rukhmini, W/o Baiaram Das Age 45 3 Farida Begam, W/o Moyunus, Age 55 Rukhsana Begam, W10 Mohammad Rasmd Khan, 22 years Bebi Nur}ahan, Dfo Mohammad Yunus, Age 19 yeare @ The foliowing order Raie‘ev Guptai CJ. Shri Akhii Mishra, learned Deputy Govemment Advopate for the State has raised a preiiminary objection about the maintainability of the Revision Petition as the petitionericomplainant l nbw has a right to file an appeal against the judgment of acquittal ujnder the amended provisions of Section 3272 Code of Criminal Rrccedure. iu‘ 2i SS’nri Alok Bakshi, learned counsel for the petitioner in view of ‘, l il‘ ‘ e above preiiminary objection, seeks permission to withdraw the i . Rjevisien Petiiior‘u with liberty of filing a petition for grant of speciai x leave lo appeal and appeai against the impugned judgment of \ écquiital. 3) Permission granted 4i With the above liberty, the Revision Petition is dismissed as \ iiindrawn. l r The Registry is directed to return certified copy of the impugned judgment of acquittal to the learned counsel for the etitioner immediately. ) The Registry is further directed to tag lA No.1/2G10 in i3riminal Appeal No.277/201 O; which has been wrongly tagged in :his Criminal Revision Sdl- i ; 0}‘*" pad ma i Chief Jusu'ce Sdl- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge of the Court was passed by ‘gt‘g