Banwari Lal Sharma, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has preferred this revision petition against the judgment dated 14.02.1996 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar Camp Court Bhadra in Criminal Appeal No. 25/1995, whereby he acquitted the respondents -accused while reversing the order dated 16.09.1995 passed by the learned Civil Judge (JD) cum Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bhadra in Criminal Case No. 517/1992 whereby the respondents -accused were convicted and sentenced for the offences under Sections 326, 326/149, 148 and 447 IPC.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that a residential plot was allotted to the petitioner from Gram Panchayat Sagda on 20.05.1979 and the respondents -accused wanted to evict them from the said plot forcibly, therefore, a civil suit was also filed in which order for maintaining status quo was passed. On 17.06.1991, at about 4.00 p.m., when the petitioner -complainant reached on his plot, he saw that all the respondents -accused were trying to break the wall of the plot and when he tried to stop them, then respondent -accused Prahalad, who was having kassi in his hand, put a kassi blow on his hand due to which his index finger cut down. On the aforesaid information, an FIR No. 54/1991 was registered and investigation commenced. After investigation, the police filed negative Final Report before the learned trial court. The petitioner -complainant filed protest petition against the negative Final Report on which the learned trial court took cognizance against the respondents -accused on 26.09.1992. The learned trial court, thereafter, framed charges for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 447, 426 and 323/149 IPC to which they denied and claimed trial. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined as many as 5 witnesses and proved Ex. P/1 to Ex. P/5. The respondents -accused were thereafter examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which they denied the prosecution story and examined Pratap (DW -1) and Dinu (DW -2). The learned trial court, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, convicted and sentenced the respondents -accused as aforesaid vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.12.1995.
(3.) BEING aggrieved of the aforesaid judgment and order dated 16.12.1995, the respondents -accused preferred appeal before the learned appellate court, which was allowed vide judgment dated 14.02.1996 and the respondents -accused were acquitted.;