ORDER : 1. The appellant/complainant preferred this acquittal appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 29.10.2013, passed in Criminal Revision No. 39/2013 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, District Raigarh, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has affirmed the order of acquittal dated 20.01.2013, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sarangarh, in Criminal Case No. 350/2008. 2. As per the case of prosecution, it is alleged that respondents No.1 & 2 encroached the ancestral property of the appellant, due to which a dispute arose between both of them. During that time respondents No. 1 & 2 used filthy language against the appellant and also committed marpeet with him. Matter was reported by the complainant/appellant and on the basis of which offences under Sections 294 & 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against respondents No.1 & 2. After conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed. The trial Court framed the particulars of offences and on 20.01.2013 during the proceedings of Mega Lok Adalat, closed the proceedings of the trial Court against respondents No.1 & 2 under Section 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and discharged respondents No. 1 & 2 from the charges leveled against them. The said order of learned J.M.F.C. has been assailed by the appellant herein before the Sessions Judge. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh vide impugned order dated 29.10.2013 affirmed the said order of discharge/acquittal of respondents No.1 & 2. Hence, this appeal. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/complainant submits that the learned Court of Sessions has committed manifest illegality in acquitting respondents No. 1 & 2 from offences punishable under Sections 294 & 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as ingredients constituted the said offences have been duly established by the prosecution and, therefore, the order of acquittal deserves to be set-aside. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the orders passed by the trial Court as well as the Revisional Court and gone through the records available. 5. Perusal of the record of learned J.M.F.C. shows that the chargesheet was filed on 17.06.2008 and particulars of offences have been framed by the learned J.M.F.C. on 16.07.2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 294 & 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It was a summons case. 5. Perusal of the record of learned J.M.F.C. shows that the chargesheet was filed on 17.06.2008 and particulars of offences have been framed by the learned J.M.F.C. on 16.07.2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 294 & 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It was a summons case. The trial Court continuously gave time to the prosecution for production of its witnesses before the trial Court for recording their evidence, but till 14.09.2012, the prosecution failed to produce any of the witnesses before the trial Court, therefore, on 20.01.2013 during the Mega Lok Adalat, the trial Court stopped the proceedings under Section 258 of the Cr.P.C. and discharged respondents No.1 & 2. 6. The findings recorded by the trial Court for stopping the proceedings is in accordance with law. Since the prosecution failed to produce its evidence for about 05 years, therefore, the trial Court rightly stopped the proceedings under Section 258 of the Cr.P.C. Learned Revisional Court also duly affirmed the said findings recorded by the learned trial Court. 7. Thus, taking into consideration the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in above referred cases and in view of the findings recorded by the trial Court as well as the Revisional Court in this regard, I do not found any irregularity or illegality in the orders passed by the learned trial Court as well as the learned Revisional Court. 8. Accordingly, this acquittal appeal stands dismissed having no merit.