Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 752 (RAJ)

Bhajan v. State of Rajasthan

2012-03-27

MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

body2012
JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal revision petition has been filed by the accused-petitioners against the judgment and order dated 29.1.2003 of Judicial Magistrate First Class Bonli convicting and sentencing the accused-petitioners Gopal son of Ram Chandra, Chhitar son of Ramchandra, Devlal son of Sukhchandra, Kanji son of Gopal, and Mohan Lal son of Chhitar for the offence under Sections 427 and 447 but they have been given the benefit of the provisions of Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act and released on admonition and the accused-petitioners Budhram son of Jagannath, Ramkesh son of Chhitar, Dhansukh son of Chhitar, Bhajan son of Ram Chandra, Kalyan son of Sukhchand, Kailash son of Sukhchanda, Ratanlal son of Kalyan, Jagannath son of Ramchandra, and Pukhraj son of Chhitar were also convicted for the offence under Sections 427 and 447 but have been sentenced for the fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence under Section 447 and Rs. 7 2,000/- for the offence under Section 427 I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine they were directed to suffer six months imprisonment. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Against the order dated 29.1.2003 the accused-petitioners filed appeal which was also partly allowed by the order dated 22.5.2003 by the Additional Sessions Judge Sawai Madhopur. By this judgment the order. of the trial Court was confirmed but in respect of accused Budhram, Ramkesh, Dhansukh and Ratan Lal the judgment of conviction and sentence was quashed. 2. The learned counsel for the accused-petitioners does not challenge the conviction and sentence part of giving probation under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act, but further stated that the accused-petitioners Gopal son of Ram Chandra, Chhitar son of Ramchandra, Devlal son of Sukhchandra, Kanji son of Gopal, and Mohan Lal son of Chhitar may also be given the benefit of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed this prayer. 4. The request of the learned counsel for the petitioners is genuine. The conviction and sentence of the accused-petitioners is maintained and the revision petition is partly allowed and ends of justice would be met in case the petitioners Gopal son of Ram Chandra, Chhitar son of Ramchandra, Devlal son of Sukhchandra, Kanji son of Gopal, and Mohan Lal son of Chhitar are also given the benefit of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act. Ordered accordingly. Ordered accordingly. The petitioners will not repeat such types of offence in future. The fine as ordered by the Courts below will have to be deposited by the petitioners Bhajan son of Ram Chandra, Kalyan son of Sukhchand, Kailash son of Sukhchanda, Jagannath son of Ramchandra, and Pukhraj son of Chhitar.The judgment of the Courts below are modified as indicated above.Revision partly allowed. *******