VIMLA DEVI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitionercomplainant against the order dtd. 19/4/2022, passed by learned Upper Session Judge No.2, Sri Ganganagar in Cr. Appeal No.33/2018 (CIS No.78/2018) whereby the learned appellate court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment dtd. 20/2/2018, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.1, Sri Ganganagar in Cr. Case No.370/2017 whereby the learned trial court convicted the respondents No.2 & 3 for offences under Ss. 452, 323, 324, 34 IPC but gave benefit of probation under Sec. 4 of Probation of Offenders Act. The respondents No.2 & 3 were directed to be released on probation provided each of them furnishes personal bond and a surety bond in the sum of Rs.10,000.00 each to keep peace and maintain good behaviour. They were further directed not to repeat the offence and to appear and receive sentence when ever called upon to do so during the period of one year. The trial court also imposed Rs.2,000.00 (Rs.1,000.00 each) as litigation cost upon the respondents No.2 & 3. By this revision petition, the petitionercomplainant has made challenge only to the extent of benefit of probation given to the respondents No.2 & 3 by the courts below. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as set up is that on 10/1/2001, complainant Vidhya Devi submitted a Parcha Bayan to the effect that when she was alone at her home and was brooming in the porch of the house, the accused persons threatened to kill her while they were standing on the terrace. The house of the accused persons is adjacent to the house of the complainant. The accused persons jumped into the porch armed with Kassi and Balli and caused injuries to the complainant. On shouting, complainant's family members came to rescue her, upon which the accused persons ran away. On this Parcha Bayan, a case for offences under Sec. 307, 452, 323, 324, 34 IPC was registered by the Police against the accused-persons and commenced investigation.

(2.) On completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed only against the accused Prithvi Raj and Jisukh. During the trial, accused Prithvi Raj expired and the trial court abated the proceedings against accused Prithvi. Thereafter, on an application under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C., the trial court took cognizance against accused Sanjay. Thereafter, charges of the case were framed against the accused-respondents No.2 & 3 for offences under Ss. 452, 323, 324, 34 IPC, which they denied and claimed trial.

(3.) During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses and got exhibited various documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused respondents No.2 & 3 were recorded under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. In defence, no witness was examined.