K V NATH Vs. RAGHUNATH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.4.1994 passed by Shri D.S. Sidhu, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, while allowing the appeal filed by the respondents, set aside the order of conviction passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi.

(2.) In brief, the prosecution case was that the petitioner was in occupation of the premises bearing No. 36/1, Raghunath Building as a tenant of the respondent Raghunath. He was paying Rs. 100.00 per month as rent for residential portion and Rs. 70.00 per month as rent for a shop of the said building. On 8.4.1981, at about 10.30 P.M., the respondents came to the spot with intent to dispossess the petitioner from the residential portion of the said building. As per prosecution case, while the respondent Raghunath engaged the petitioner in conversion, the remaining respondents entered the residential portion occupied by the petitioner and dispossessed him by throwing away his household goods therefrom. The petitioner reported the matter to the police but the police did not take any action. However on 9.4.1981, the petitioner lodged a written report at the Police Station Vasant Vihar as a result whereof a case under Sections 448/34 Indian Penal Code was registered against the respondents. Apprehending their arrest, the respondents again came to the spot on 10.4.1981 at about 9 or 9.30 A.M. and on noticing the petitioner's household goods lying scattered in front of his residential portion, removed them in front of his shop. Thereafter, on a distress telephone call given by the petitioner, the police came to the spot, and started investigation. On completion of the investigation, the respondents were charge-sheeted under Sections 448/34 IPC. The respondents abjured their guilt and examined two witnesses (D.W.1 and D.W.2) in support of their defence.

(3.) The trial court after assessing the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the prosecution has proved its case under Sections 448/34 Indian Penal Code and as such convicted the respondents under Sections 448/34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. On appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge after reappraising the evidence set aside the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and acquitted the respondents. The State did not file any appeal against the acquittal of the respondents herein. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the impugned order of the acquittal, has come up in revision before this Court.