DUDA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed against the judgment of the appellate court whereby the conviction of the present petitioners for the offences under Sections 323, 325,325/34 IPC has been confirmed and setting aside the sentence, the present petitioners have been extended the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act,1958 and have been further ordered to pay Rs.4000.00 as compensation.

(2.) THE short facts of the case are that the complainant Gordhan Ram submitted a written report at Police Station Dangiyawas stating therein that on 28.12.2003, the present petitioners Duda Ram and other along with gun, lathis and hockeys entered in their plot and started beating to Gokal Ram, Jamna Devi, Babu Lal, Neni Devi and Dinesh. All received injuries. Duda Ram threatened Neni Devi aiming 12 bore gun on her and asked her to leave the plot. On this FIR No. 180/2003 for the offences under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 447 and 427 IPC and under Section 3/30 of the Arms Act has been registered. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed for the above offences. The charges have been framed against the present petitioners for the aforesaid offences. The prosecution examined as many 12 witnesses and also exhibited documents in support of its case. The statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C. Four witnesses have been produced in defence also some documents have also been exhibited in support of defence. After hearing the parties, the present petitioners have been convicted and sentenced as under:-

(3.) THE only contention of the present petitioners before this court is that the complainant party entered into the disputed plot and inflicted injuries to the present petitioners. The complainant party was the aggressor and the present petitioners were in the settled possession of the plot. Cross FIR has also been lodged by the present petitioners in which the complainant party has been convicted and when the complainant party was the aggressor, the present petitioners have acted in their self-defence and no offence has been committed by them.