DWARKA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 26.11.2008 passed by Addl. District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Sikar in Cr. Appeal No. 18/2006, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been partly allowed, and while maintaining the judgment and order passed by the trial court, benefit of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders' Act has also been extended to the petitioner, in addition to the benefit of Section 3, which was granted to the petitioner by Judicial Magistrate, Shrimadhopur vide judgment dated 31.10.2006 in Cr. Case No, 169/2002 while acquitting the petitioner for the offence under Section 323 IPC, on the basis of compromise. Brief facts of the case are that on 19.8.2002, the complainant lodged an FIR No. 126/2002 at Police Station, Khandela for the offence under Section 323 and 336 IPC against the petitioner, who is the brother of the complainant and living in the same house. The dispute arose between them on account of petty matter of high volume of radio/transistor. Thereafter the investigation was commenced and after completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the accused petitioner. Thereafter cognizance was taken and trial was commenced. During trial, a compromise was arrived at between the parties, which was filed by them before the trial court. The same was verified and attested by Judicial Magistrate, Shrimadhopur vide order dated 14.8.2003 and vide judgment dated 31.10.2006 the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused petitioner for the offence under Section 323 IPC, and convicted the petitioner for the offence u/S. 336 IPC and released him under Section 3 of Probation of Offenders' Act after due admonition. Against the said judgment and order passed by the trial Court, the petitioner filed the appeal, and the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Sikar vide judgment dated 26.11.2008 partly allowed the appeal and granted benefit of Section 12 also to the petitioner in addition to benefit under Section 3 of Probation of Offenders' Act.

(2.) Against the said judgment dated passed by the appellate court, this revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended looking to the fact that already the petitioner has been acquitted for the offence under Section 323 IPC; the benefit of Section 3 and 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act have been given to the petitioner; complainant and petitioner both are brothers and both are residing in the same house; both the parties have entered into the compromise; and the dispute between them is private or personal in nature and that arose on a petty matter with regard to volume of radio/transistor, as such the petitioner should be acquitted because impugned judgments have put an stigma upon him and on account of this stigma, he will have to suffer during his entire life.