[2025:RJ-JP:42910] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 848/2024 Ram Prasad Saini, President District Mali (Saini) Samaj Sansthan, Bundi (Raj) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p 2. Chouthmal Saini Ex-Sarpanch Matunda S/o Nathulalm, Resident Matunda District Bundi (Raj) 3. Badrilal Saini S/o Madhulal, Resident Of In Front Of Kumbha Stadium Chatrapura, Bundi District Bundi (Raj) 4. Sita Ram Saini S/o Raghunath, Resident Of 1-E-17, Jawahar Nagar Housing Board, Nainwa Road, Bundi District Bundi (Raj) 5. Bhagota S/o Not Known, Resident Of Nainwa Road, District Bundi (Raj) (Deceased) 6. Dhannalal S/o Not Known, Resident Of Nainwa Road, Bundi ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/10/2025 1. The instant criminal revision petition has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 27.03.2024 passed by the Session Judge, Bundi in criminal appeal No. 324/2018 by which the judgment dated 16.08.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Bundi in criminal case No. 373/2011 has been upheld and the appeal filed by the petitioner has been rejected. [2025:RJ-JP:42910] (2 of 3) [CRLR-848/2024] 2. By passing the impugned order dated 16.08.2018, the accused respondents have been acquitted from the charge under Section 427 IPC. 3. Brief facts of the case are that a complaint was lodged against the accused respondents wherein it was alleged that the petitioner entered in the hostel premises on 19.03.2008 without seeking permission and abused the contractor and labourers working there and snatched the tagari, fawara, karni, hammer and inchi tape from them. 4. Upon this, crime no. 283/2008 was registered with Police Station, Sadar, Bundi wherein after investigation, no case was made out against the accused respondents, hence a Final Report Negative was submitted. Against the aforesaid Final Report Negative, protest petition was filed wherein a cognizance was taken against the respondents for the offence under Section 427 IPC and thereafter substance of accusation was recorded and the statements of three prosecution witnesses were recorded and three documents were exhibited. 5. After completion of the trial, statements of accused respondents were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein they denied their participation in the incident but no evidence was produced in their defence. 6. Learned Trial Court after hearing the arguments of both sides, acquitted the accused respondents by giving them the benefit of doubt vide judgment dated 16.08.2018. 7. Feeling aggrieved by this impugned order, an appeal was preferred before the Court of Sessions Judge, Bundi who too upheld the judgment passed by the Judicial Magistrate and [2025:RJ-JP:42910] (3 of 3) [CRLR-848/2024] rejected the appeal submitted by the petitioner, vide judgment dated 27.03.2024. 8. A concurrent finding of fact has been recorded by both the Courts below, after appreciating the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, who failed to prove the case beyond the reasonable doubt against the respondents. 9. It is the settled proposition of law that if there are two versions of the prosecution side, where one version supports the contentions of defence then certainly it would go in favour of the accused and herein the instant case, the witnesses have miserably failed to prove the case against the accused–respondents beyond the reasonable doubt, this Court finds no illegality neither on the facts nor on law, which require any interference of this Court to invoke its revisional jurisdiction. 10. This Court finds no merit and substance in this revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/14