A.K. Nandi, J.

1. THE Sessions case ended in an acquittal of 21 accused persons charged under sections 309, 207, 323 read with sections 149 and 148 I.P.C. The son of one of the victims, in the occurrence Mannan Sekh, who eventually succumbed to his injury, has preferred this revisional application.

2. THE opposite party contends that while State has not preferred any appeal against the order of acquittal, the petitioner cannot challenge the court's finding. It cannot be laid down as a blanket proposition that a private complainant in a case initiated on a police report can in no circumstances prefer a revision. Ordinarily the court is very reluctant to interfere with the finding of acquittal in a revision preferred by a private complainant. In Satyendra v. Ram Narain (AIR 1975 SC 580) it was held that where the judgment of the Sessions Judge did not suffer from any manifest illegality and the interests of justice did not require the high Court to interfere with the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Court, the setting aside of the acquittal and ordering a retrial is a transgression of the narrow limits of the revisional jurisdiction. In K. Chinna Sway, Reddy v. State