JUDGMENT 1. :- I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor for the State. Pursuant to the directions of this court dated 29/9/1997 the concerned Investigating Officer who was entrusted with the task of investigation in the matter has presented himself before this court. He has stated that on account of his transfer from Jhunjhunu to Dausa arid thereafter Dausa to Alwar, he could not be made aware of the subsequent developments of the case, therefore, he could not appear before the concerned trial court. This is not a ground for the Investigating Officer to have left the matter unfinished at the investigation stage itself particularly, when from the perusal of the summoned record of the concerned Trial Court it is apparent that atleast on half a dozen occasions the bailable warrants were issued to the witnesses cited by the prosecution to procure their presence by the concerned trial court and the Investigating Officer committed a deliberate lapse in the matter by not attending to the case and even if the Investigating Officer had been transferred to other Districts as aforesaid, it was the primary duty of the prosecution to have seen to it that the task of investigation which was left unfinished by the previous Investigating Officer on account of his transfer to other Districts within Rajasthan the subsequent Investigating Officer should have been entrusted with the remaining task of investigation or the concerned Investigating Officer should have made himself available before the said court for his examination in evidence since his transfer by itself is no ground for either not completing the investigation or his examination in evidence before the said court. As a result of this deliberate lapse, the remaining 4 witnesses out of 8 witnesses as cited by the prosecution could not be examined thereby prejudicing the prosecution case and the fair trial. 2. As a result of this deliberate lapse, the remaining 4 witnesses out of 8 witnesses as cited by the prosecution could not be examined thereby prejudicing the prosecution case and the fair trial. 2. It is well settled law on the subject that the case as set up by the prosecution should not suffer for the lapse of the Investigating Agency in not examining the necessary witnesses as so cited by the Prosecution, soon after the filing of the charge-sheet at the stage of prosecution evidence hence its benefit will necessarily go to the accused and this is one of those cases in which the prosecution has committed deliberate lapse for not having examined the necessary witnesses at the evidence stage before the concerned trial Court. It is for this reason that Director of Prosecution was directed vide order dated 29.9.97 of this Court to henceforth give positive instructions to all the concerned Investigating Officers who are entrusted with the task of investigation to be more careful in future and also to give timely instructions to the concerned Additional Public Prosecutors/State Counsels in the matters assigned to them well in advance so that they are able to render proper assistance to the court. 3. The petitioner who is an employee of Rajasthan Road Transport Corporation was convicted by the trial court to undergo a sentence of 4 years RI and fine of Rs. 5,000/- for having committed an offence punishable under Section 326 Indian Penal Code. The said sentence as awarded by the trial court was reduced in appeal by the Sessions Court to 6 months RI and fine of Rs. 2500/- out of which, Rs. 2,000/- was directed to be paid by way of compensation to the complainant. I am informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the requisite fine has already been deposited with the trial court and the petitioner has also undergone the sentence of 6 months RI as awarded by the Appellate Court. 4. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and also that the petitioner is not a previous convict, I am of the view that the conviction as awarded to the petitioner in respect of an offence punishable under Section 326 Indian Penal Code be converted into Section 335 Indian Penal Code. 4. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and also that the petitioner is not a previous convict, I am of the view that the conviction as awarded to the petitioner in respect of an offence punishable under Section 326 Indian Penal Code be converted into Section 335 Indian Penal Code. The offence under Section 335 Indian Penal Code is punishable with imprisonment of 4 years RI with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- or both. Since the petitioner has already undergone the sentence of six months RI and has also deposited the requisite fine of Rs. 2000 with the trial court and he is not a previous convict as per the record, hence, keeping in view the past conduct of the petitioner, I am of the view that the conviction be so altered from Section 326 Indian Penal Code to Section 335 Indian Penal Code and the benefit of probation be also extended to the petitioner under Section 2 & 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act read with Section 360 and 361 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accordingly directed to execute the personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. The petitioner is directed to keep peace and be of good behaviour for a period of 6 months with effect from the date he appears before the concerned trial court and executes his personal bond as so directed. I would like to observe that in case the aforesaid condition as imposed by this court is complied with and strictly observed by the petitioner for the aforesaid period, his service career shall not be effected or prejudiced on this account. 5. With the above observations, the revision petition is allowed and disposed of. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Home Secretary of the State of Rajasthan, Director of Prosecutions and also to the D.G.P. of the State for information and future guidance with a specific direction to bring this order to the notice of all police officers not below the rank of Superintendent of Police/Additional Superintendent of Police for their immediate compliance. The summoned record be sent back to District & Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu immediately.Revision Disposed Of. *******