[2025:RJ-JD:33717]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 126/2007 Dhan Raj S/o Late Gulab Chand Aged 51 years, R/o Village Gullar Tehsil Parbatsar District Nagaur ----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan

2. Keshra Ram S/o Hukma Ram

3. Deena Ram S/o Hukma Ram R/o Village Gullar Tehsil Parbatsar District Nagaur (PS Pilwa)

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.K. Parihar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shrawan Singh, PP Mr. G.R. Punia, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Madhav Beniwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

ORDER PRONOUNCED ON ::: 31/07/2025 ORDER RESERVED ON ::: 09/07/2025 BY THE COURT:-

1. The instant Criminal Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the order of acquittal dated 10.11.2004 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/SCT (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Merta in Sessions Case No.22/2004 whereby the accused-respondents Kesararam and Deenaram have been acquitted of the charges levelled against them under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

2. The brief facts leading to the present revision are that on 26.06.2003 at around 11:00 AM, the complainant Dhanraj Mochi, a member of the Scheduled Caste community, visited his field situated in Khasra No. 193 at the border of village Gular, Mauja, when he allegedly noticed the accused persons—namely Hukmaram, Madharam, Kesararam, and Dinaram—erecting fencing over his cultivated land with the purported intent to wrongfully dispossess him. When objected, it is alleged that the accused persons abused him and attempted to assault him with lathis. The complainant claimed that he had been granted possession of the said land by the administration on 02.04.2003.

2.1. On the basis of the written report filed on the same day, an FIR bearing No. 80/2003 came to be registered at Police Station Pilwa under Sections 143 and 447 IPC, as well as Sections 3(1)(v) and 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act. Upon completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed against accused Kesararam and Dinaram under Section 447 IPC and Section 3(1)(v) of the SC/ST Act before the learned ACJM, Parbatsar. Finding the matter triable by a Special Court, the case was accordingly committed and registered before the learned Special Judge on 05.03.2004.

2.2. Charges were framed on 19.04.2004, which were denied by the accused. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined eight witnesses and exhibited ten documents including maps and Jamabandi records. However, upon meticulous evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence, the learned trial court recorded a finding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. It emerged from the evidence of PW-7 (Patwari Bhawarlal) and PW-8 (Tehsildar Radha Kumar Gupta), through Exhibits P1 to P10, that the land in question, marked as Khasra No.193, was shown to be in the possession of one Devaram Meghwal, not the complainant. It was further corroborated by the testimony of the complainant himself that he had previously sold 1 bigha of the disputed land to Devaram Meghwal.

3. Moreover, the maps produced by the revenue officers indicated that Khasra No. 194 lay adjacent to the land in dispute, and the complainant had no immediate agricultural holdings in proximity to the land allegedly encroached by the accused. This position was also supported by defence witness Bhiyaram (DW-1), who affirmed that the complainant’s land was not situated near the field of the accused.

4. In view of the above findings, the trial court came to the conclusion that the element of wrongful dispossession of a member of a Scheduled Caste was not proved, nor was criminal trespass into the lawful possession of the complainant established as required under Section 447 IPC. Accordingly, the accused were acquitted of the charges.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the revisionist and perused the entire record of the t