IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.501 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2003 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== 1. Hirdayanand Singh S/O Late Daroga Singh R/O Village- Narayanpur, PS- Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur 2. Om Prakash Singh S/O Late Dasai Singh R/O Village- Narayanpur, PS- Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur 3. Gorakh Singh @ Gorakhnath Singh S/O Late Sheobachan Singh R/O Village- Narayanpur, PS- Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur 4. Omkar Nath Singh S/O Late Dasai Singh R/O Village- Narayanpur, PS- Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mayashankar Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER 4 06-05-2025 The petitioners are accused persons in G.R. Case No. 648 of 2003. It is on record that G.R. Case No. 648 of 2003 was disposed of by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bhojpur at Ara, recorded acquittal in favour of accused persons of charges under Sections 420/467/468/471 of the I.P.C. and Section 82 of the Registration Act. 2. The State of Bihar preferred an appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Bhojpur at Ara. Against the aforesaid Judgment and order of acquittal dated 24th January, 2020, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna High Court CR. REV. No.501 of 2024(4) dt.06-05-2025 2/3 Bhojpur at Ara, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Bhojpur at Ara allowed Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 2020 by setting aside the order of acquittal and remanded the case back to the trial court, to pass a fresh judgment on due consideration of the documents, which were exhibited. 3. Being aggrieved, the petitioners/accused persons has approached this court under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. in revisional jurisdiction. 4. Only submission made by the learned Advocate for the petitioners is that the trial court considered two exhibits, being exhibit nos. 1 and 2, and other exhibits were not relevant and therefore, those documents were not considered by the trial court. 5. It is needless to say that relevancy of a document and its admissibility as well as evidenciary value is a question of fact to be decided by the court of trial. 6. The Revisional Court can not look into the factual aspect of the dispute on assessment of exhibited documents. 7. In this respect, there is a mark differences between the appellate jurisdiction and revisional jurisdiction. 8. For the reasons stated above and in view of the fact that the petitioners will not be prejudiced if they take part in the Patna High Court CR. REV. No.501 of 2024(4) dt.06-05-2025 3/3 trial of G.R. Case No. 648 of 2003 after remand, this Court is of the view that the instant criminal revision is devoid of any merit and accordingly, the same is dismissed on contest. 9. The lower court record be sent back to the learned court below. pravinkumar/- (Bibek Chaudhuri, J) U T