GITA Vs. TARSEM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) GITA daughter of Hans Raj, wife of Tarsem Lal has filed the present revision petition against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar dated 14.2.1990, vide which the appeal filed by the petitioner against the impugned judgment of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar, dated 17.11.1988, granting probation to all the respondents was dismissed on the ground that she has no locus standi to file the appeal.

(2.) THERE is no need to enter into detailed discussion so far as merits are concerned as Ms. Tanu Bedi, learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly contends that at this stage she does not intend to attack the impugned order releasing the respondents on probation but confines her arguments to the limited aspect of compensation, which should have been granted to the petitioner from atleast Tarsem Lal, the husband, who stands convicted under Section 406 IPC. The other grouse of the petitioner is that the costs of litigation awarded as Rs. 400/- each against Tarsem Lal, Babu Ram and Soma Devi is also on a lower side and the same may be enhanced.

(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for both the sides and going through the record, I am of the considered view that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, ends of justice would be adequately met if Tarsem Lal respondent No. 1, husband of the petitioner, who has been convicted under Section 406 IPC, is directed to pay compensation to the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act. It is ordered accordingly. The costs of litigation of Rs. 400/- imposed upon Tarsem Lal respondent by the trial Court are also increased to Rs. 700/-. However, the costs of litigation imposed upon Babu Ram and Soma Devi respondents shall remain as it is.