JUDGMENT 1. - The State of Rajasthan has preferred this appeal under Section 378(1)(iii) Cr.PC. against the judgment dated 19.10.2002 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Saran (for short 'the learned trial Court') in Sessions case No. 164/2001, whereby after convicting and sentencing the accused respondents gave benefit of section 4(1) of Probation of Offenders Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution brief facts of the case are that on 01.05.2001 Smt. Kaushalya Bai submitted a parcha-bayan to this effect that yesterday night the complainant was sleeping at the house of her father. Near-about 11.00 PM in the night she went to toilet in the 'Bade' and sat to pass 'urine'. Some persons were hiding in the 'bada' and at that time the light was switch-on in the 'bade'. All of a sudden noise came of gun shot, which hit on her hip because of complainant cried. Then Mukesh @ Budha Meena seems to be ran away from there. Immediately the father of complainant Amarlal, brother Ramdhan, Mama Mangilal, Ramlei, Satyanarayan Meena etc. came there then these persons ran from there. 3. On the basis of this parcha-bayan Ex.P1, the police registered an FIR No. 154/2001 for the offence under section 307/34 IPC. 4. The police after usual investigation submitted challan against the accused respondents for the offence under sections 307, 326 and 34 IPC before learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baran. 5. The learned trial Court framed charges against the accused respondents separately for the offence under sections 307/34 and 326/34 IPC. The accused respondents did not plead guilty and claimed to be.tried in the matter. 6. Prosecution in support of its case produced as many as 17 witnesses and certain documents were got exhibited. 7. Thereafter the statement of the accused-respondents under Section 313 Cr.RC. was recorded. 8. After conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Court vide its judgment dated 19.10.2002 convicted the accused-respondents from the aforesaid offences by giving them benefit of Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act. 9. Aggrieved with the impugned judgment dated 19.10.2002 passed by learned trial Court, the State of Rajasthan has preferred the instant appeal. 10. In this appeal it has been submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the learned trial Court has not considered the statements of the prosecution witnesses properly. 9. Aggrieved with the impugned judgment dated 19.10.2002 passed by learned trial Court, the State of Rajasthan has preferred the instant appeal. 10. In this appeal it has been submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the learned trial Court has not considered the statements of the prosecution witnesses properly. He has further contended that the learned trial Court has wrongly given benefit of Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act to the accused respondents. Thus, the impugned judgment dated 19.10.2002 passed by the learned trial Court is erroneous one and should be quashed and set aside. 11. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the 45 accused-respondents submits that PW17 Rampal has not supported the case of the prosecution and has thus been declared hostile. He submits that all the witnesses are of one family. He submits that Kaushaliya Bai in her statement has stated that accused persons cannot be identified in the dark. He submits that the doctor in his statement has stated that such an injury was not sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature and at the most this case can be of for the offence under section 324 IPC. He submits that PW 7 Mukut Bihari Sharma in his testimony has stated that no recovery of gun has been made. Lastly, learned counsel submits that the accused respondents are facing trial since 01.05.2001, which tantamount to a punishment and mental agony. Thus, the Judgment dated 19.10.2002 passed by the learned trial Court need no interference of this Court. 12. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the accused-respondents and also gone through the record of the case. 13. Accordingly, this appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan fails and the same is hereby dismissed. after confirming the judgment dated 19.10.2002 passed by learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Baran in Sessions case No. 164/2001. *******