Rajasthan High CourtBhanwar Singh vs State And Ors on 16 January, 2013Author:Mn BhandariBench:Mn BhandariIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN 
 JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORDER 
SB Criminal Revision Petition No.1739/2009
Bhanwar Singh versus State of Rajasthan through PP & ors  
16.1.2013
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI
None  for petitioner 
Mr Laxman Meena, PP  for the State 
BY THE COURT:By this criminal revision petition, challenge is made to the order of acquittal dated 13.10.2009.A case was registered for offence undersections 143,447and379IPC. Accordingly, charges were framed. Both the parties led their evidence and statement of  accused was recorded undersection 313CrPC.The allegations against the accused were that on 18.2.2005 they entered in the field of complainant and taken away standing crop. The prosecution led its evidence and then statement of the accused undersection 313CrPC was recorded. PW-2 Bhanwar Singh stated that after ploughing the crop, he went to Punjab and his grand father was looking after it. It was a joint crop. The crop was later on taken away by the accused persons Gopal, Kana, Karna, Bhura and Manna and their family members. The FIR was immediately lodged. PW-3 Shankar stated that the Tehsildar and the Patwari handed over possession of the land to Bhanwar Singh and they started taking crop which was lying at the time of incidence. PW-4 Ram Kishan stated that he was engaged as a labourer where crop was standing. PW-6 Bhagchand made a report. PW-7 Kalu was declared as hostile. Statements of other witnesses were also considered apart from defence witness Gopal. The court below found that litigation is pending between the parties and on an appeal preferred by Gopal, order of status quo was passed by the revenue court which was continuing since 13.4.2004. No evidence could be led to indicate possession of land  by Bhanwar Lal on the day of incident i.e. 18.2.1985. Taking note of over all evidence, prosecution could not prove its case beyond doubt more specifically when the dispute was regarding possession of land and pendency of revenue cases and interim order therein. Accordingly, all the accused were acquitted of the offence undersections 143,447and379IPC. I do not find any illegality in the order of acquittal. Hence, criminal revision petition is dismissed.(MN BHANDARI), J.bnsharma
All corrections made in the judgment/ order have been incorporated in the judgment/ order being emailed.(BN Sharma)
PS-cum-J