1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. ORDER State of Rajasthan Vs. Harnek Singh & others. SB CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.237/2008. Under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. DATE OF ORDER: 3rd September, 2008. PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. PATHAK Mr. B.K. Sharma PP for the State. Mr. S.K. Jindal for the respondents. BY THE COURT: This revision petition under section 397 read with 401 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the order dated 29.11.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Bundi in Criminal Case No.139/2007 whereby the learned appellate court upheld the judgment delivered by the Judicial Magistrate, Hindauncity dated 6.2.2007. The contention of the learned Public Prosecutor is that the learned trial court has not properly appreciated the evidence. According to the learned Public Prosecutor accused-respondents were liable to be convicted for the offence committed by them under section 447 IPC. On the other hand, learned counsel for the non- petitioners contends that it is the essence of Section 447 IPC that a person should not encroach upon the land which is in 2 possession of others. According to the learned counsel, the evidence which has been brought on record is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused, therefore, acquitted the accused- respondents from the charge levelled against them. It is contended that the learned appellate court also found that the findings of acquittal recorded were based on proper appreciation of evidence, therefore, the revision petition filed by the State is liable to be dismissed. I have considered the rival submissions made before me by both the sides. In the instant case, it appears that in relation to the land bearing khasra nos.1525 and 1532 situated in Bada Gaon Tehsil Hindoli, an application was moved before the learned Executive Magistrate, a report was also lodged in the concerned police station and on that report FIR No.330/2000 was registerd for the offence under section 447 IPC. After completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed and accused non-petitioners were tried for committing offence under section 447 IPC but in the absence of sufficient material and evidence brought on record acquittal was recorded by the learned trial court on 6.23.2007 and was challenged before the learned appellate court but without any success. Thus, it appears that concurrently it has been found that the prosecution evidence was not sufficient to hold guilty the accused non-petitioners. It has also been found by the learned courts below that the statement of PW-5 was not sufficient to hold 3 guilty the accused. In the above circumstances, there appears no merit in the contentions raised by the learned Public Prosecutor that the accused non-petitioners were liable to be convicted and the learned trial court has misread the evidence. The revision petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the revision petition stands dismissed. (S.P. PATHAK,J)