DHANBIR Vs. NATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DHANBIR , Pop Singh, Jagbir, Satpal, Ombir sons of Indier, were tried and convicted for the offences punisbale under Sections 323 and 325 read with Section 34 IPC by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon on September 13, 1998. Instead of sentencing them to undergo imprisonment, the trial Court released them on probation under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned trial Court, the complainant-Nathan on whose statement the police was set in motion, preferred an appeal which was partly accepted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, who after maintaining the conviction and the order passed under Section 360 Cr.P.C., ordered that the complainant and the other injured should be compensated and the accused-respondents were directed to pay Rs. 6,000/- each to the injured by way of compensation. The accused- respondents, by way of filing this Criminal Revision, have challenged the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, on the grounds that the learned Additional Sessions Judge was in error in directing the accused to pay compensation to the complainant and the injured, as an appeal under Section 377(1) Cr.P.C. would lie directly to the High Court against the sentence passed by the trial Court on the ground of its inadequacy.

(2.) THE backdrop of the case is that on August 25, 1991, a minor dispute arose between Nathan-complainant and his son Hat Ram on one side and the present petitioners on the other side. The accused-petitioners were blocking the way in the street by keeping sand. On account of this, the flow of the water was blocked. Popan hit a 'lathi' blow on the left foot of the complainant-Nathan and another 'lathi' blow on his left arm. In the meantime, Dhanbir and Satpal arrived at the scene and they also caused injuries by 'lathis' to Nathan on the different parts of his body. When Hat Ram tried to rescue his father, then Ombir dealt 'lathi' blows and 'ballam' blows on his head, left elbow and the back side of the left shoulder of Hat Ram. On hearing the alarm raised by the injured, one Balwan was attracted to the spot and saved Nathan and his son from the clutches of the accused, whereafter they ran away. The injured were medically examined. The matter was reported to the police and dafter the completion of the investigation report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was presented in the Court.

(3.) I have heard Mr. R.K. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sultan Singh, learned A.A.G for the State and Mr. Baldev Singh, learned Advocate for respondent No. 2