JUDGMENT 1. - 1. The instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., is directed against the judgment and order dated 4.10.2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Deedwana (for short 'the appellate Court' hereinafter) in Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 2002, whereby the appellate Court acquitted respondent No. 2 Ved Prakash of the offenses under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC. Aggrieved by the order of acquittal, the petitioner complainant has filed the instant revision petition. Before the Court below, it was a State case; State v. Ved Prakash. The State of Rajasthan has neither preferred leave to appeal or appeal before this Court. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the judgment and order impugned as also record of the Trial Court. 3. From the statements of some of the witnesses, it is dear that son of the petitioner Baldevram got down from a private bus which came from Nuwa and thereafter suddenly started crossing the road, at that time a bus of Haryana Roadways came and hit injured Baldevram resulting thereby that he suffered injuries. From the statement of witnesses and site map it is evident that the injured got down from a private bus which came from Nuwa and thereafter from the rear side of the bus he suddenly started crossing the road and that was the cause of the accident. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 has relief on a decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mahadeo Hari Lokre v. State of Maharashtra, 1972 Cr.L.J. 49, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held that if a pedestrian suddenly crosses a road without taking note of the approaching bus there is every possibility of his dashing against the bus without the driver becoming aware of it. The bus driver cannot save accident however slowly he may be driving and, therefore, he cannot be held to be negligent in such a case. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied on a decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Baldevji Bharthiji Thakore v. State of Gujarat, 1979 Cr.L.J. 1136 . In the instant case, injured Baldevram suddenly came on the road after getting down from a private bus and therefore, it was not possible for the driver of the roadways bus to notice well in advance in order to save the injured. In the instant case, injured Baldevram suddenly came on the road after getting down from a private bus and therefore, it was not possible for the driver of the roadways bus to notice well in advance in order to save the injured. In the circumstances, therefore, the instant case is clearly covered by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Mahadeo Hari Lokre (supra). Moreso, it is a revision by complainant against acquittal. In view of provisions of Section 401 Cr.RC. the order of acquittal cannot be converted into one of conviction. In the circumstances therefore, I do not find any error, illegality or perversity in the order impugned warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction. The revision petition is dismissed accordingly. Stay application also stands dismissed.Revision petition dismissed. *******