ORDER

1. This criminal revision has been preferred by the petitioner under section 397 r/w section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against acquittal of respondents of offence under sections 148, 324, 307, 307/149 of the I.P.C. from the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Vidisha in Sessions Trial No.195/2002 vide judgment dated 5.10.2004.

2. As per prosecution story, complainant- Kamlesh Singh (PW-2) lodged an oral complaint to the effect that on 4.4.2002 when he was going with his brother Virendra Singh in a tractor towards agricultural field of Nadiyare and when he reached near the agriculture field of Aman Singh, Aman Singh, Jairam, Ranveer Singh, Jitendra Singh came and Aman Singh told them that he will not allow to pass the tractor through his agricultural field; however, there was no crop in his agricultural field. The complainant party said that there is way in his agricultural field allow us to go through the field and on this Aman Singh and other co-accused persons started quarreling him. Aman Singh assaulted his brother Virendra Singh on head by means of pharsa, Ranvir Singh assaulted him by means of katarna which hit him on his right hand. Jairam assaulted him by means of katarna which hit him on his back, as a result of which, he fell down. His brothers Badam Singh and Thakur Singh, his nephew Ranjit and Brijendra Singh who were storing gram in threshing floor came to rescue them then Sardar Singh, Kalyan Singh, Padam Singh, Taran Singh, Komal Singh came armed with pharsa and katarna along with Aman Singh, Jairam Singh, Ranvir Singh, Jitendra Singh with common intention started marpeet as a result of which Thakur Singh, Badam Singh, Ranjit Singh, Brijendra Singh received grievous injuries. Bihari Singh, Jeevan Singh, Gyan Singh, Babu Lal were witnessed of the incident and when these people reached on the spot, all the accused persons left the place. Before six months, the complainant party and the accused persons have a dispute over a land and due to this previous enmity, the aforesaid accused persons assaulted the complainant party. On the basis of the aforesaid, an FIR has been registered at police station Khamkheda, District Vidisha bearing Crime No. 0/2 for the offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 of the I.P.C. On lodging of F.I.R, criminal law was triggered and set in motion and after completion of investigation, the charge sheet were submitted before the competent Court.

3. The learned trial Court framed the charges against the respondents for the offence punishable under sections 148, 324, 307 and 307/149 of I.P.C, which were denied by them. The learned trial Court after hearing learned counsel for the rival parties and after appreciating the evidence available on record, vide judgment dated 5/10/2004 acquitted the respondents from the offence punishable under sections 148, 324, 307 and 307/149 IPC, against which, the present revision is filed.

4. The present revision petition has been filed on the ground that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Sessions Court is illegal and deserves to be set aside. It was further pleaded that to prove the offence against the respondents sufficient evidence was on record. The findings of the learned Sessions Court is perverse and deserves to be set aside. In such circumstances, the revision filed by the petitioner be allowed and the impugned judgment passed by the learned Sessions Court be set aside and the respondents be convicted.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that there was no evidence to prove the offence alleged to have been committed by the respondents. It is submitted that after due appreciation of evidence, the learned Sessions Court found that prosecution has failed to prove the case against the respondents beyond reasonable doubt. It is submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, no case is made out for interference, hence revision filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed.

6. Having regar