JUDGMENT 1. - This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner- complainant against the judgment and order dated 8.5.2003 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaitaran District Pali in Criminal Case No.440/94 (92/91) by which the learned ACJM acquitted the accused-respondents Nos. 4 to 6, namely, Bhanwardas, Kalyan Das and Babulal @ Babudas respectively and also accused-Bhagunath of the charge for the offence u/s. 325 TPC, but convicted them of the charges for the offence u/ss. 447 & 323 IPC, but instead of sentencing them, he released them on probation u/s. 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 and he further ordered that each accused person shall pay Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant-petitioner as compensation. 2. In, this petition, the main submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-complainant is that the learned ACJM has wrongly acquitted accused-respondents for the offence u/s. 325 IPC. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor and gone through the impugned judgment and order dated 8.5.2003 passed by the learned ACJM. 4. The learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate at page 38 of the impugned judgment and order dated 8.5.2003 has observed that since the Radiologist was not produced for evidence, therefore, in absence of that, it could not be concluded that injured received grievous injuries. In my considered opinion, these findings cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse. Therefore, no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the learned ACJM in acquitting the accused persons of the charge for the offence u/s. 325 IPC. 5. For the reasons stated above, no interference is called for with the impugned judgment and order dated 8.5.2003 and this revision petition deserves to be dismissed.Accordingly, this revision petition filed by the petitioner-complainant is dismissed.Revision petition dismissed. *******