Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ramniwas vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:4791) on 24 January, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:4791]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1421/2024
Ramniwas S/o Shri Shyodan Ram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o
Bhavsiyan Police Station Parbatsar, District Didwana-Kuchaman.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Dhanna Ram S/o Mangu Ram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o
Bhavsiyan Police Station Parbatsar, District Didwana-
Kuchaman.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Acharya
For Respondent(s) : Mrs. Sonu Manawat, PP
Mr. Vikas Bijarnia, for respondent
no.2
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
24/01/2025
The petitioner has filed the present criminal revision petition
being aggrieved by the judgment dt. 21.10.2024 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Parbatsar, District
Didwana Kuchaman in Appeal No. 92/2018 whereby, the appellate
court while partly allowing the appeal, upheld the conviction of
petitioner for offence under Section 341, 323, 325 IPC vide order
dated 18.05.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Parbatsar but extended the benefit of probation under Section 4 of
Probation of Offenders Act and directed the petitioner to deposit a
sum of Rs. 1,05,000/- including legal expenses, to be disbursed to
injured.
[2025:RJ-JD:4791] (2 of 5) [CRLR-1421/2024]
Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 20.05.2012, the
complainant Shrawan Ram submitted a written report before the
SHO, P.S Parbatsar stating therein that when he and his uncle
Dhanna ram were on the field, the accused Ramniwas alongwith
family members armed with lathi, axe etc entered into their field
and assaulted Dhanna Ram due to which Dhanna Ram sustained
various injuries.
On this report, the FIR was registered and the police started
investigation. After investigation, the police filed challan against
the accused petitioner for offence under Sections 341, 323,
326/34 IPC.Thereafter, charges were framed against the accused
petitioner for offence under Sections 341, 323, 326/34 IPC. The
prosecution in support of its case examined as many as ten
witnesses and various documents were exhibited. The statement
of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded wherein, he
denied the charges and claimed trial.
After conclusion of trial, the learned trial court convicted the
petitioner for offence under Section 341, 323, 325 IPC and
sentenced him as under :-
Offence Punishment
Section 323 IPC Three months simple imprisonment and fine
of Rs. 500/-. In default of fine, to undergo
seven days SI
15 days simple imprisonment with Rs.200/-
Section 341 IPC fine. In default of payment of fine, to
undergo one day simple imprisonment
One year simple imprisonment alongwith
Section 325 IPC fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of fine, to
undergone one month simple imprisonment
Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal before
[2025:RJ-JD:4791] (3 of 5) [CRLR-1421/2024]
the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Parbatsar. The
respondent no.2 also filed an appeal for enhancement of sentence.
The appellate court vide judgment dated 21.10.2024 dismissed
the appeal of respondent no.2 and while partly allowing the appeal
of petitioner, set aside the order of sentence and while granting
benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders
Act, directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,05,000/- Act
before the trial court under Section 5 of the Act.
Counsel for the complainant petitioner submits that the
appellate court has committed an error in directing the petitioner
to deposit the huge sum of compensation while extending benefit
of probation under Section 4 of the Act. It is argued that accused
petitioner is a poor person and is not in a position to pay such a
huge compensation. It is submitted that the injuries to respondent
no.2 were not such so as to entitle him to a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-
as compensation. Therefore, it is prayed that the impugned order
dated 21.10.2024 may be quashed and set aside to the extent of
direction of payment of compensation in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
to respondent no.2.
I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and gone through
the material on record.
From the evidence on record so also finding arrived by the
learned trial court and appellate court, it appears that the learned
courts below have convicted the accused petitioner on the basis of
statement of the witnesses so also the injury report of injured.
The courts below came to the conclusion by way of detailed and
[2025:RJ-JD:4791] (4 of 5) [CRLR-1421/2024]
speaking order that the prosecution has proved the charges
against the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. However, looking
to the fact that the accused is facing protracted trial so also
mental and physical agony there are no criminal antecedents
against the petitioner, the appellate court has granted the benefit
of probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. So
far as the amount of compensation is concerned, after considering
the evidence available on record, this Court is of the opinion that
the appellate court has not committed any error in convicting the
accused petitioner granting benefit of probation under Section 4 of
the Probation of Offenders Act, however, some leniency can be
shown to the extent of amount of compensation which has been
ordered to be paid by the petitioner.
Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances,
this Court deems it appropriate to reduce the amount of
compensation ordered to be paid by the petitioner. Accordingly,
the impugned order dated 21.10.2024 is hereby modified to the
extent that the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.
75,000/- in lieu of compensation and Rs.5,000/- as legal
expenses, instead of Rs. 1,05,000/-. Upon deposition of aforesaid
amount, Rs.75,000/- may be disbursed to the respondent no.2
complainant. If the petitioner has already deposited the sum of
Rs. 1,05,000/-, then Rs.25,000/- may be refunded to the
petitioner forthwith.
Stay petition also stands disposed of.
[2025:RJ-JD:4791] (5 of 5) [CRLR-1421/2024]
Record of the courts below be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
137-BJSH/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
