(1.) This revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 9.6.2016 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Dabra, District Gwalior in Cri.Appeal No.217/2014, whereby modifying the judgment of the JMFC Dabra, the conviction of the respondents No.2 to 5 under Sections 325/34 and 323/34 of IPC has been maintained but they have been sentenced till rising of the Court with fine of Rs.2000/- each under Section 325/34 of IPC and fine of Rs.1000/- each under Section 323/34 of IPC. The JMFC Dabra had sentenced the respondents to two years RI each with fine of Rs.500/- each under Section 325/34 IPC and one year RI with fine of Rs.500/- each under Section 323/34 vide judgment dated 15.5.2014 passed in Criminal Case No.1151/2007.
(2.) As per prosecution case, on 20.10.2007 at 2 pm, complainant Ramdevi Kushwaha was busy in preparing cow-dung bricks (Kanda), at the same time accused Atibal Gurjar, Rajendra, Virendra and Ghitiya came there with their tractor and started cultivation. On her resist, they abused her and Virendra gave blow by an axe, which caused injury on her left hand. Accused Atibal gave fist blow on her face then she fell down, then Rajendra gave lathi blow and accused Ghitiya assaulted by kicks and fists. On her crying, Amar Singh and her son Kummer along with other persons reached there. All the four accused left the place abusing her. The matter was reported to Police Station Dabra, where an FIR bearing Crime No. 715/2007 was registered against the accused respondents. After completion of the investigation charge sheet was filed before the JMFC, Dabra.
(3.) After framing the charge and recording the evidence, the offences under Sections 325/34 and 323/34 IPC were found proved and the respondents No.2 to 5 were convicted under Section 325/34 IPC sentenced to two years RI each with fine of Rs.500/- each and under Section 323/34 IPC sentenced to one year RI with fine of Rs.500/- each. Against the judgment of the trial court, the appeal was preferred which was partly allowed and the respondents were sentenced as stated herein above.