Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Balu Harijan vs State on 4 April, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 336/2000
Balu Harijan
----Petitioner
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ushman Ghani
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, P.P.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
04/04/2022
1. In the wake of instant surge in COVID - 19 cases and spread
of its highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being
maintained, while hearing the matters in the Court, for the safety
of all concerned.
2. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with
Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following
reliefs:
"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that impugned
judgment of learned appellate court by which petitioner has
been convicted may kindly be quashed and set aside, and any
other order, direction which in the facts and circumstance may
kindly be passed in favour of petitioner."
3. The brief facts of the case as placed before this Court by the
learned counsel for the petitioner are that an F.I.R. was filed
against the revisionist - petitioner by Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi
Samiti ("the Samiti"), Bhilwara on 13.02.1983 in Police Station
(Downloaded on 06/04/2022 at 08:27:40 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLR-336/2000]
Kotwali City, Bhilwara alleging that the petitioner and two others
are enroaching upon the land of the Samiti, and are guilty of
criminal trepass. And that, in pursuance to the same, a criminal
case was initiated and charge under Section 447 I.P.C. was
framed, and upon trial, the learned C.J.M., Bhilwara convicted the
revisionist - petitioner, vide order dated 25.11.1994, sentenced
him to 3 months rigorous imprisonment along with imposition of a
fine of Rs. 500/-, and in default 15 days rigorous imprisonment.
And that, the revisionist - petitioner has been granted the benefit
under the Probation of Offenders Act vide the order of the A.D.J.
No. 2 Bhilwara, while upholding the conviction of the learned Court
below.
4. Learned counsel for the revisionist petitioner submits that
the Samiti initiated proceedings before the S.D.O. Bhilwara, case
no. 58/83, under the Rajastan Public Premises (Unauthorised
Occupants Removal) Act, 1964 to eject the petitioner from the
land in question, permitting the Samiti to evict the petitioner.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the learned Court
below has passed the impugned order after an appreciation of the
facts and circumstances of the case, and the relevant evidences
based on record. And that, therefore, it does not suffer from any
legal infirmity.
6. Heard learned counsel for both parties, and perused the
record of the case.
7. This Court, at the outset, observes that the impugned order
passed by the learned A.D.J., Bhilwara, has already granted the
revisionist - petitioner the benefit under the Probation of
Offenders Act, 1958. And that, since the punishment for criminal
(Downloaded on 06/04/2022 at 08:27:40 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLR-336/2000]
trespass under Section 447 I.P.C. is a maximum of three months,
the learned Court below has rightly granted the revisionist
petitioner benefit under the said Act of 1958, taking into
consideration that he did not have any prior criminal antecedents
to the incident in question.
8. On a consideration of the overall facts and circumstances of
the case, this Court does not find any reason so as to grant any
further indulgence to the petitioner, in view of the indulgence
already granted to him by the learned trial court, while passing
the impugned order.
9. In view of the above, no case for interference is made out.
10. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. All pending
applications stand disposed of. Record of the learned court below
be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
61-SKant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
