Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ratna Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:27653) on 20 June, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:27653]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1318/2025
1. Ratna Ram S/o Bhanwaru Ram, Aged About 65 Years, R/o
Morara Police Station Merta City, District Nagaur
2. Punaki Devi W/o Ratna Ram, Aged About 61 Years, R/o
Morara Police Station Merta City, District Nagaur
----Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ravindra Acharya
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG
with Mr. Kuldeep
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
(VACATION JUDGE)
Order
20/06/2025
1. The present appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellants
Ratna Ram and Punaki Devi, against the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 22.05.2025, passed by the learned
Sessions Judge, Merta in Sessions Case No.51/2023.
2. The appellants by the judgment aforesaid have been
convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 341 &
323/34 of the IPC and sentenced. For the offence under Section
341 of the IPC the appellants were sentenced for 1 month simple
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of
fine they were to further undergo 15 days' simple imprisonment.
For the offence under Section 323/34 of the IPC, the appellants
were sentenced for one year simple imprisonment with a fine of
[2025:RJ-JD:27653] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-1318/2025]
Rs.1000/-. In default of payment of fine they were to further
undergo 1 months' simple imprisonment.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant
Rameshwarlal gave parcha bayan to the police at Govt. Hospital,
Merta City alleging therein that on 01.11.2019 at around 1:30-
2:00 pm, he and his brother Shrawan Ram after ploughing the
field departed for home and when they were returning at about
2:30 pm accused Bhinya Ram, mother of Bhinya Ram, sister
Punkii and Ratna Ram, the husband of punaki and wife of Baldev
Ram came with iron pipe and assaulted upon them in which they
sustained injuries.
4. The trial was commenced and the learned trial Court
acquitted the accused Bhinya Ram and convicted the appellants
Ratna Ram and Punaki Devi for the offences under Sections 341 &
323/34 of the IPC and sentenced as aforesaid.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants Ratna Ram and Punaki Devi are aged about 65 years
and 61 years respectively. It was the first offence committed by
the appellants no other offence has been committed by them. The
FIR was registered in the year 2019 and the appellants have faced
the trial for about six years and therefore, while not challenging
the conviction of the appellants, he prayed that while maintaining
conviction of the appellants, the appellants be released on
probation while granting benefit under the Probation of Offenders
Act, 1958.
6. Learned Additional Advocate General while opposing the
appeal submits that the offences punishable under Sections 341 &
323/34 of the IPC have been proved against the appellants
[2025:RJ-JD:27653] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-1318/2025]
beyond reasonable doubt. But, he does not have any objection, if
while maintaining the conviction aforesaid, the appellants are
released on probation.
7. Accordingly, the appellants conviction for the offences under
Sections 341 & 323/34 of the IPC is maintained, their sentence is
set aside and they are released on probation for a period of one
year. The appellants shall furnish the probation bond and security
bond to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. The appellants
shall deposit a cost of Rs.10,000/- each before the learned trial
Court for the purpose of prosecution cost which shall be deposited
in the Litigants Welfare Fund, Merta.
8. The criminal appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
9. All pending applications also stand disposed of.
(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),VJ
250-Ramesh Goyal, P.S./-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
