[2025:RJ-JP:28580] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 2145/2016 Naresh Kumar S/o Shri Chhotelal, R/o Basai, Tehsil And Police Station Khetri, District Jhunjhunu, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through P.p. 2. Rohitash S/o Shri Ram Charan, aged about 57 years, R/o Basai, Tehsil And Police Station Khetri, District Jhunjhunu, Raj. 3. Roshan S/o Shri Ram Charan, aged about 55 years, R/o Basai, Tehsil And Police Station Khetri, District Jhunjhunu, Raj. 4. Jagmal S/o Shri Ram Charan, aged about 50 years, R/o Basai, Tehsil And Police Station Khetri, District Jhunjhunu, Raj. 5. Leela Ram S/o Shri Ram Charan, aged about 44 years, R/o Basai, Tehsil And Police Station Khetri, District Jhunjhunu, Raj. 6. Satyanarayan S/o Shri Ram Charan, aged about 44 years, R/o Basai, Tehsil And Police Station Khetri, District Jhunjhunu, Raj. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Punia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 28/07/2025 1. Instant revision petition is preferred by petitioner- complainant Naresh Kumar S/o Shri Chhotelal aggrieved from order dated 07.09.2016 in Criminal Appeal No.09/2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khetri, District Jhunjhunu, [2025:RJ-JP:28580] (2 of 3) [CRLR-2145/2016] whereby judgment of acquittal dated 19.01.2010 in Criminal Case No.272/2004 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khetri, District Jhunjhunu was upheld. 2. Considered submission of learned counsel for petitioner- complainant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record. 3. On basis of report (Ex.P-1), FIR No.200/2004 was registered at P.S. Khetri and after investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against 5 persons under Sections 143, 427 and 448 IPC. After recording plea, the prosecution has examined 9 witnesses and exhibited 3 documents. The accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they have submitted 2 witnesses (DW-1 and DW- 2) in defence and exhibited 6 documents. The Trial Court has acquitted respondent Nos. 2 to 6 from charge after extending benefit of doubt. 4. On an appeal preferred by petitioner-complainant before learned Additional Sessions Judge, same was also dismissed after considering the entire material on record. Now, the revision petition is preferred by petitioner-complainant to pursue the order of acquittal. 5. In case of Mrinal Das & Ors. Vs. State of Tripura (2011) 9 SCC 479 while considering the appeal against acquittal, Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down that an appeal against acquittal in absence of perversity in the judgment or order, the interference is not warranted. The appeal can be heard by Appellate Court being the final Court of fact and is fully competent to re-appreciate, re- consider and review the evidence and take its own time. [2025:RJ-JP:28580] (3 of 3) [CRLR-2145/2016] 6. Having considered the evidence, as considered by learned Trial Court particularly the cross-examination of witnesses as referred along with defence clearly indicate that the Trial Court has found that a civil case is already decided in favour of complainant, which was stayed by learned ADJ. The Appellate Court has also considered the issue of criminal trespass along with cutting of trees, and further mischief and both the Courts below have considered the evidence in right spirit and there is no perversity or illegality in the order passed by the Courts below, therefore, there is no scope of interference in the order passed by the learned Appellate Court. 7. In view of discussion made herein above, the instant revision petition is sans merits and same is liable to be dismissed. 8. As a result, the instant revision petition is preferred by petitioner-complainant Naresh Kumar S/o Shri Chhotelal, is hereby dismissed with pending application(s), if any. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J GAURAV /45