Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rameshwar Lal vs State And Ors. (2025:Rj-Jd:13161) on 5 March, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:13161]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1273/2007
Rameshwar Lal S/o Surajmal Soni, resident of Parevada, Tehsil
Sujangarh, District Churu (Raj)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, Through PP
2. Munna Nath
3. Revant Nath
4. Sant Nath
5. Jeevan Nath
6. Anna Nath
All sons of Asu Nath, residents of Parevada, Tehsil Sujangarh,
District Churu (Raj.)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harshvardhan Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Rathore, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
ORDER
05/03/2025
1. By way of filing the present revision petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed on behalf of the petitioner that this revision petition may kindly be allowed, judgment and order dated 30.8.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sujangarh District Churu in Sessions Case No.7/2007 (29/2001) [State Vs. Munna Nath and Others] may kindly be quashed and set aside and the matter be remanded back to the learned trial court for passing decision afresh."
2. As per the prosecution story, on 07.07.2001 the statements of the petitioner were recorded while he was admitted at Government Hospital, Sandwa wherein he stated that on (Downloaded on 21/03/2025 at 11:40:06 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:13161] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1273/2007] 06.07.2001 at around 09:30 P.M., he heard some noise outside the house of Mangi Lal, upon which he went there and saw Munna Nath hurling abuses, to which, he tried to stop him. Meanwhile, Munna Nath along with his brothers- Rewant Nath, Sant Nath, Jeevan Nath and Anna Nath armed with lathis and stones assaulted one Vishna Ram and Sita Ram and when the petitioner tried to intervene, Sant Nath and Munna Nath gave a lathi blow on the petitioner's head and thereafter all the respondents assaulted him, to which he became unconscious.
3. On the basis of the aforesaid parcha bayan, an FIR No.58/2001 was registered at Police Station Sandwa, District Churu for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 147, 148 and 149 IPC and the investigation was commenced. The investigating agency after conducting a thorough investigation in the matter charge-sheeted the respondents No.2-6 for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 307/149, 326/149 and 323/149. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses and also got exhibited 28 documents.
4. At the conclusion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sujangarh, District Churu vide its judgment and order dated 30.08.2007 while acquitting the accused respondents for the chartges so framed against them and, has convicted only the accused respondents- No.6 & 4 for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 of IPC respectively and has released them on probation.
5. The learned trial Court in the impugned judgment and order dated 30.08.2007, after due consideration of the arguments of the parties at Bar and having perusing the record of the case, (Downloaded on 21/03/2025 at 11:40:06 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:13161] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1273/2007] recorded a finding that both the parties have suffered injuries in the incident and if the accused persons are sent to jail it will have adverse effect on their families and the rivalry between the families will increase, therefor, the accused persons be given an opportunity to be released on probation.
6. Having carefully gone through the impugned judgment and the order of conviction dated 30.08.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sujangarh, District Churu, this Court is of a view that the findings of the learned trial court are not perverse and the impugned judgment and order of conviction have been passed in the year 2007 after due consideration of the material facts and circumstances of the case. This Court, after due analysis of the record of the case, does not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 30.08.2007.
7. Thus, the present revision petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 29-Divya/-
(Downloaded on 21/03/2025 at 11:40:06 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)