Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Heera Lal Gurjar vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:29141) on 7 July, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:29141]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1441/2022
Heera Lal Gurjar S/o Soram Gurjar, Aged About 41 Years, R/o
Gurjar Mohalla Senti Chittorgarh Ps Sadar Chittorgarh Dist.
Chittorgarh
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Bagdi Ram S/o Ghisa Gurjar, R/o Gurjar Mohalla Senti
Chittorgarh Ps Sadar Chittorgarh Dist. Chittorgarh
3. Nosar W/o Bagdi Gurjar, R/o Gurjar Mohalla Senti
Chittorgarh Ps Sadar Chittorgarh Dist. Chittorgarh
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhagat Dadhich
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pawan Kumar Bhati, PP
Mr. Abhishek Charan, for respondents
NO.2 & 3
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
07/07/2025
Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioners
against judgment and order dated 06.08.2022 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Chittorgarh, in Cr. Appeal
No.276/2016 whereby, the learned appellate court dismissed the
appeal and affirmed the judgment and order dated 06.08.2016,
passed by learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh, in
Cr. Case No.256/2013 (202/2012), whereby the learned trial court
while convicting the respondents for offences under Sections 341,
323 & 324/34 of IPC, gave benefit of Probation under Section 4 of
[2025:RJ-JD:29141] (2 of 4) [CRLR-1441/2022]
Probation of Offenders Act to the respondents and released the
accused for furnishing the bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- each.
Briefly stated, the prosecution case as set up is that on
18.03.2012 petitioner complainant went to home after closing his
shop. At that time, accused Badri Ram attacked the petitioner and
his family members by sword and they received various injuries.
On the said report, Police registered a case against the accused
persons and started investigation.
On completion of investigation, the police filed challan
against the accused-respondents No.2 & 3. Thereafter, the trial
court framed charges against the accused respondents No.2 & 3
for offences under Sections 341, 323 & 324/34 IPC, who denied
the charges and claimed trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as ten witnesses in support of its case and exhibited certain
documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused persons
including the petitioners were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C.
In defence, three witnesses were examined and certain
documents were exhibited.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 06.08.2016 convicted the respondents
No.2 & 3 for offences under Sections 341, 323 & 324/34 IPC, but
gave them benefit of Probation under Section 4 of Probation of
Offenders Act and released the accused for furnishing bail bonds
of Rs.20,000/- each.
Being aggrieved by the judgment of the trial Court, the petitioner
complainant preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court,
[2025:RJ-JD:29141] (3 of 4) [CRLR-1441/2022]
which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 06.08.2022. Hence,
this revision petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner-complainant argued that
learned appellate court has committed grave error in giving
benefit of probation to the accused-respondents. Counsel submits
that there is ample evidence available on record that the accused-
respondents had assaulted the petitioner and his family members
with sword. Yet, the courts below 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 judgment may be quashed and set aside to the
extent of giving benefit of probation to the accused-respondents
and the sentence may be awarded.
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 the accused-respondents for offence under Sections
341, 323, 324/34 IPC and granted the benefit of Section 4 of
Probation of Offenders Act and released the respondents on the
condition of furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- each. The
petitioner-complainant filed an appeal against the order of the
Trial Court for granting the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of
Offenders Act. The learned appellate court while taking into
consideration all facts and circumstances of the case upheld the
judgment passed by the Trial Court.
[2025:RJ-JD:29141] (4 of 4) [CRLR-1441/2022]
Considering the nature of injuries and the fact that there are
no other criminal antecedents against the accused-respondents,
the courts below have rightly given the benefit of Section 4 of
Probation of Offenders Act to the accused-respondents.
There is no infirmity and illegality in the impugned appellate
judgment and thus, the same does not warrant any interference.
Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.
Record of the case be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
97-Ishan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
