S.N. Deedwania, J. - (1.) This revision is against the judgment dated 3.2.1976., of learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Kapasin, acquitting the accused of the offence under Section 325/323, I. P. C.
(2.) This revision has been preferred by Mangi Lal, the injured and his brother Ramsukh, who lodged the First Information Report of the incident in the police. The State did not choose to go in appeal against the acquittal of the accused.
(3.) It was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate has misread the evidence of the injured Mangi Lal, and also disbelieved him on insufficient grounds. I am not inclined to appreciate this argument, advanced on behalf of the petitioners, in view to the following observations of the Supreme Court:;