[2025:RJ-JP:19770] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 966/2019 1. Narsingh S/o Shri Satyanarayan, R/o Ward No 19 Losal Ps Losal Dist. Sikar Raj. 2. Murari Lal S/o Shri Satyanarayan, R/o Ward No 19 Losal Ps Losal Dist. Sikar Raj. ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashir Gauri for Mr. Ripu Daman Singh Naruka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 24/04/2025 1. Instant revision petition is preferred by petitioners-accused aggrieved from dismissal of Criminal Appeal No.107/2018 on 06.02.2019 affirming the judgment of conviction dated 25.04.2018 in Criminal Case No. 179/2013 by learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Sikar, whereby both the petitioners were convicted under Sections 341 and 323 IPC further released on probation under Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act. 2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the Trial Court without considering that a false report was registered and no independent witness was examined by the prosecution has believed the story of prosecution. He further submitted that three independent witnesses PW-3 (Prahlad), PW-4 (Pooran Mal) and [2025:RJ-JP:19770] (2 of 3) [CRLR-966/2019] PW-5 (Raju Ram) have not supported the case of prosecution. He further submitted that just with intention to grab a piece of land, the instant case was registered. He further submitted that the Trial Court has committed serious error, which were ignored by the Appellate Court. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. 4. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On basis of report Ex.P-1, dated 26.10.2013 submitted by PW-1 (Kiran Kanwar) FIR No.251/2013 under Section 509 IPC was registered at P.S. Losal, District Sikar. After investigation, police has filed a Charge-sheet against both the petitioners under Sections 341, 323 and 509 IPC. The prosecution has examined seven witnesses and exhibited four documents. Both the petitioners-accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they have examined as DW-1 (Bhagwati Devi) as defence witness. The Trial Court has acquitted the petitioners from charge under Section 509 IPC, but convicted them under Sections 341 and 323 IPC, and released them on probation after extending benefit under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. The petitioners have preferred an appeal and same was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge. 6. We have considered the evidence of PW-1 and also the fact there was a delay of 5 days in reporting the matter to the police. The evidence on record has also suggested that there were ongoing civil dispute between the parties. Any animosity is a “Two way Sword”. The evidence of PW-1 (Kiran Kanwar) was supported [2025:RJ-JP:19770] (3 of 3) [CRLR-966/2019] by PW-3 (Prahlad), PW-2 (Radhi Devi) and PW-6 (Bhagwani @ Narayani). Two witnesses PW-4 (Pooran Mal) and PW-5 (Raju Ram) have turned hostile. We have considered the evidence particularly cross-examination of these witnesses. Though, PW-3 (Prahlad) has also turned hostile, but he named Narsingh for involvement in the incident. 7. Having considered the entire evidence on record, it is apparent that PW-1 (Kiran Kanwar) was assaulted by both the petitioners-accused and the Trial Court after considering the evidence has not committed any error while convicting the petitioners under Section 323 and 341 IPC. The Appellate Court has also rightly dismissed the appeal. 8. In view of discussion made herein above, the revision petition sans merits and same is liable to be dismissed. 9. In view of aforesaid, the instant revision petition is hereby dismissed with pending application, if any. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J GAURAV /77