Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sukhdev Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:6879) on 4 February, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:6879]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1621/2024
Sukhdev Singh S/o Shri Dhara Singh, Aged About 59 Years, R/o
3 W, Police Station Kesrisinghpur, Tehsil Srikaranpur, District Sri
Ganganagar.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Ravi @ Ravi Singh S/o Harbans Singh,
3. Jitendra Singh S/o Harbans Singh,
4. Saba @ Sahab Singh S/o Baldev Singh,
5. Kulvindra Singh S/o Nakchhtar Singh,
6. Judge Singh S/o Baldev Singh,
Respondents No.2 to 6 are R/o Village 3 W, Police Station
Kesrisinghpur, Tehsil Srikaranpur, District Sri Ganganagar.
(Raj)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tirupati Chandra
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, AAG with
Mr. KS Kumpawat
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
04/02/2025
Instant revision petition has been filed by the
petitioner/complainant against the order dated 04.10.2024,
passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Srikaranpur, District
Sriganganagar in Cr. Appeal No.04/2024 whereby the learned
appellate court partly allowed the appeal of the accused-
respondents No.2 to 6 and while affirming the judgment of the
learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srikaranpur, District
Sriganganagar, dated 26.02.2024 passed in Cr. Case No.268/2014
[2025:RJ-JD:6879] (2 of 4) [CRLR-1621/2024]
to the extent of conviction for offences under Sections 452, 341,
323, 325, 148 R/w Section 149 IPC, set aside the sentence and
instead gave benefit of probation to the accused-respondent Nos.2
to 6 under Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act.
Briefly stated, the prosecution case as set up is that
06.02.2014, complainant/injured Sukhdev Singh gave a parcha
bayan to the Police at Government hospital to the effect that when
he was at home, accused persons came in intoxicated condition
armed with deadly weapon and assaulted him. On the said parcha
bayan, Police registered a case against the accused-respondents
and started investigation.
On completion of investigation, the police filed challan
against the accused-respondents. Thereafter, the trial court
framed charges for offences under Sections 452, 341, 323, 325,
148 R/w Section 149 IPC. The accused respondents pleaded not
guilty and claimed trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as 7 witnesses in support of its case and exhibited certain
documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused respondents
were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. In defence, the accused-
respondents produced two witnesses and exhibited certain
documents.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 26.02.2024 convicted and sentenced
the accused-respondents for aforesaid offences.
Being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the
accused-respondents preferred an appeal before the learned
appellate court, which came to be partly allowed vide judgment
[2025:RJ-JD:6879] (3 of 4) [CRLR-1621/2024]
dated 04.10.2024. The learned appellate court while maintaining
the conviction of the accused-respondents for the aforesaid
offences, set aside the sentence as awarded by the trial court and
instead gave benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Probation
of Offenders Act to the accused-respondents. Hence, this revision
petition on behalf of the complainant/injured against the judgment
of the appellate court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that learned
appellate court has committed grave error in giving benefit of
probation to the accused-respondents despite the fact that the
prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubts.
Counsel submits that there is ample evidence available on record
against the accused-respondents for commission of offence. Yet,
the appellate court did not consider these aspects of the matter
and despite conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court for
aforesaid offences to the accused-respondents, the appellate court
did not award any sentence and instead gave benefit of probation
under Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, which is perverse
and illegal. Thus, it is prayed that the impugned appellate
judgment may be quashed and set aside to the extent of giving
benefit of probation to the accused-respondents and the sentence
awarded by the trial court may be upheld.
I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for
the petitioner and perused the judgments of the appellate court as
well as trial court and also gone through the entire record.
The learned trial court, after meticulous appreciation of
evidence and considering each and every aspect of the matter, has
convicted and sentenced the accused-respondent for offence
[2025:RJ-JD:6879] (4 of 4) [CRLR-1621/2024]
under Sections 452, 341, 323, 325, 148 R/w Section 149 IPC. The
accused-respondents filed an appeal against their conviction and
sentence before the appellate court. The learned appellate court
while taking into consideration the facts that this was the first
offence of the accused-respondents and they have been facing
trial since 2014 and they also remained in custody for some time
and they are not habitual offenders, has given benefit of probation
under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act to the accused-
respondents while maintaining the conviction for the aforesaid
offences.
On perusal of the impugned judgment of the appellate court,
it appears that the learned appellate court has considered each
and every aspect of the matter while passing the impugned
judgment and has rightly extended the benefit of Probation under
Section 4 of the Act. Thus, this Court does not find any illegality
and perversity in the impugned appellate judgment and the same
does not require any interference from this Court.
In the light of aforesaid discussion, the petitioner has failed
to show any error of law or on facts on the basis of which
interference can be made by this Court in the impugned appellant
judgment under challenge.
Accordingly, the revision petition is hereby dismissed.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
19-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
