CHOTU SINGH AND ORS. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed against the judgment and order dated 3.1.2014 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Alwar in Cr. Appeal No. 227/2011 whereby he upheld the judgment of learned Addl. Chief Judl. Magistrate No. 3, Alwar dated 24.9.2011 passed in Cr. case No. 83/2006 whereby he convicted and sentenced the petitioners under Sec. 325 IPC, 6 months SI with fine of 1000/ -, Sec. 323 IPC - One month SI to petitioner No. 2 and further awarded sentence under Sec. 325/34 of IPC -6 months SI with fine of 1000/ -, Sec. 323 IPC -3 months SI, Sec. 341 IPC One month SI to petitioner No. 1 and further ordered that in default of payment of fine Addl. Imprisonment of 15 days SI for both the petitioners. Without going into the merits of the case, learned counsel for the appellants has contended that accused petitioners have remained in custody for approximately 16 days, there are cross cases between the parties, the petitioners have received injuries, there is no case pending against the petitioners except the present one. Therefore, at this stage, they are not challenging the conviction part of the judgment of the court below, but he is only requesting to this court that probation of offenders Act may be given to the petitioners and if not, then the sentence awarded to the petitioners may be reduced for the period already undergone by them in custody as indicated herein above.

(2.) LEARNED Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the same and contended that the impugned order passed by the trial court is just and proper.

(3.) LOOKING to the facts & circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner that accused petitioners have remained in custody for approximately 16 days, there are cross cases between the parties, the petitioners have received injuries, there is no case pending against the petitioners except the present one, I do not think it proper to release the petitioner on probation, but I think it just and proper to reduce the sentence of the petitioners already undergone by him in custody. Accordingly, in the result, this petition is partly allowed with the following directions: