ORDER : Mr. Kuldeep Mathur, J. - By way of filing the present revision petition, the petitioner-complainant has prayed for the following reliefs: "It is therefore respectfully prayed that this revision may kindly be allowed, the order dt.27.11.2002 passed by the learned Appellate Court may kindly be quashed and set aside and the order of Learned Trial Court Dt. 27.07.99 be upheld." 2. As per the prosecution, the allegation against the respondents is that they, in contravention of Section 4 read with rule 64 of the Rajasthan Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1961, were running their business in an illegal and unauthorized manner at a warehouse and institute situated at Police Line Road instead at a mandi yard of Pali Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Area near Housing Board, Jodhpur Road, Pali allotted and licensed to them. In pursuance of the inspection conducted on 06.06.1992 and 24.08.1992 the respondents-accused were found to be in default and had to pay a fine of Rs. 4026/- for the alleged contravention. 3. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the accused were arrested and after filing of the charge sheet, the trial against respondents - accused persons was commenced for the offence under Section 28(1) of the Rajasthan Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1961. The learned trial court after conducting regular trial convicted and sentenced the respondents - accused persons of the charges levelled against them vide order dated 27.07.1999. 4. The respondents - accused persons being aggrieved of the order dated 27.07.1999 passed against them by the learned trial court, preferred an appeal no. 8/02 (Hastimal Gautamchand & Anr. v. Krishi Upaj Samiti, Pali) before the appellate court. The learned appellate court after hearing the appeal preferred against the order dated 27.07.1999 passed by the learned trial court, acquitted the respondents - accused persons of the charges levelled against them vide impugned order dated 27.11.2002. 5. 8/02 (Hastimal Gautamchand & Anr. v. Krishi Upaj Samiti, Pali) before the appellate court. The learned appellate court after hearing the appeal preferred against the order dated 27.07.1999 passed by the learned trial court, acquitted the respondents - accused persons of the charges levelled against them vide impugned order dated 27.11.2002. 5. Upon a careful perusal of the impugned order dated 27.11.2002, this Court finds that the learned appellate court, after due consideration of the material produced before it and after perusing the statements of the various witnesses recorded before the learned trial court, has recorded a finding that though the charge against the accused-respondents was framed for the offence under section 28 (1) of the Rajasthan Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1961, however, a fine was imposed upon them considering them guilty of offence under Section 28(2) of the Rajasthan Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1961 for which neither the charges were framed nor any evidence was produced to prove the same. 6. Having carefully gone through the impugned order dated 27.11.2002 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Pali, this Court is of the view that the findings of the learned appellate Court are not perverse and the order of acquittal has been passed against accused - respondents in the year 2002. 7. After due analysis of the case file and the statements of various witnesses recorded before the learned trial court, this Court does not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order dated 27.11.2002. 8. Thus, the present revision petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.