LAWS(ORI)-1969-9-33

BANSHIDHAR PATNAIK Vs. ARJUN MOHAPATRA AND 3 ORS.

Decided On September 26, 1969
Banshidhar Patnaik Appellant
V/S
Arjun Mohapatra And 3 Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed by the informant against an order acquitting the opposite parties of charges under Sections 427 and 447, Indian Penal Code in a G.R. Case. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Petitioner is the owner of the tank constituting plot No. 100.0 and paddy land constituting plot No. (sic). It is alleged that on the date of occurrence, opposite parties dug earth from the said tank causing destruction of the fish which Petitioner had reared therein and they also constructed a rasta on the western side of the paddy land on plot No. 999 and there by damaged his crop. Opposite parties denied the allegations in toto.

(2.) ON a consideration of the evidence, the learned Magistrate found that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges and accordingly, acquitted the opposite parties. The State did not prefer an appeal.

(3.) THOUGH there is, no doubt, about the jurisdiction of the High Court to interfere in revision with orders of acquittal, the principles to be followed and the circumstances in which such interference will be justified have been clearly explained by the Supreme Court in the decision reported in Chinnaswamy v. State of A.P., 1962 S.C.D. 1004 :, A.I.R. 1962 S.C. 1783, where it has been observed: