IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. M No. 2752 of 2008 Date of Decision: February 18 , 2009 Ram Dulare ...........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Ajay Sharma Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Sidharath Sarup,Asstt.Advocate General Haryana ** Sabina, J. Respondents No. 2 to 9 were tried for an offence under Sections 143,148, 452, 323 and 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) in FIR No. 198 dated 14.10.1999 registered at Police Station Sadar Ambala. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala vide judgment and order dated 4.4.2007 convicted respondents No. 2 to 9 for an offence under Sections 143, 148, 452, 323, 506 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced them to undergo one month simple imprisonment under Section 143 IPC; to undergo six months simple imprisonment under Section 148 IPC; to undergo one year simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.200/- each under Section 452 IPC; to undergo six months simple imprisonment under Section 323 IPC and to undergo six months simple imprisonment under Section 506/149 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, respondents No. 2 to 9 preferred an appeal. The Additional Sessions Judge Ambala vide judged 17.9.2008 maintained the conviction of respondents Crl. Misc. M No. 2752 of 2008 -2- Nos. 2 to 9 as ordered by the trial Court. However, respondents No. 2 to 9 were released on probation subject to their furnishing requisite bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each with one surety of the like amount each undertaking therein that the appellants shall maintain peace and harmony for a period of one year and in case during the period they commit any offence the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court will revive. They were further directed to pay compensation of Rs.5000/- to the complainant/injured. Hence, the present revision petition has been filed by the complainant. Prosecution case in brief as noticed by the trial Court in para 2 of its judgment is as under:- “Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 14.10.1999, a complaint was lodged by one Ram Dulare son of Sarju Parsad with the police to the effect that on that date at about 9.30 P.M., his son Ram Bhawan had returned from Village Rattangarh and he was talking to him. At about 9.45 PM door of his house was knocked upon which he opened the door and one Shri Ram along with Shaish Nath present there. When the complainant asked him the matter for which he had come, Shaish Nath abused him and gave a blow of lathi on the left leg of the complainant. Then suddenly, Udey Bhan, Jai Parkash, shera resident of Rattan Garh, Ram Bachan, Sant Ram sons of Kedar Nath Mushli, Kitabu sons of Ram Shankar along with some other persons caught him and dragged out the complainant from the door of the house. They beat the complainant with fists as well as slaps and asked about Ram Bhawar. Thereafter, Udey Bhan, Siri Ram, Sant Ram, Shaish Crl. Misc. M No. 2752 of 2008 -3- Nath and Ram Bachar forcibly entered his home whereas he was held by the remaining persons. It is further averred that all the five persons i.e. Shaish Nath etc. beat Ram Bhawar with Lathis and Dandas. The complainant raised a noise upon which, many neighbours gathered including his son Siri Nath and Smt. Naraungi Devi wife of Siri Nath, who rescued them from the accused. It is further alleged that on seeing the people gathered, Shaish Nath etc. left the spot alongwith their respective weapons extending a threat to kill the complainant etc. It is alleged that when Ram Bhawar, son of he complainant had gone to Rattangarh and had demanded his money from Kitabu brother of Shaish Nath, then Kitabu had replied that their money will be paid on the same day. It is further alleged that during the quarrel the complainant has also lost about Rs.8000/- which he had kept in his pocket of the shirt. Thereafter, complainant and Ram Bhawar were got admitted in Civil Hospital, Ambala City by Siri Nath for medical treatment. On the basis of this complaint, FIR was registered. Matter was investigated. Rough site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Accused were arrested. After completion of investigation, Challan was presented in the Court for trial.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the case of the prosecution had been duly proved. All the witnesses examined by the prosecution had duly supported the prosecution case. Respondents No.2 to 9 had entered the house of the petitioner at around 10.00 P.M. and had caused injuries on the person of complainant and his son. In these Crl. Misc. M No. 2752 of 2008 -4- circumstances, respondent No.2 to 9 were not liable to be released on probation. Learned Additional Sessions Judge Amabla while releasing respondents No. 2 to 9 on probation held that they were facing trial since the year 1999 and were not previous convicts and were sole bread earners of their families. . Respondents No. 2 to 9 are not previous convicts. The object to release convict on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act is that he may get a chance to reform himself. Respondents No. 2 to 9 were also directed to pay compensation of Rs.5000/- to injured complainant. In these circumstances, the view taken by the learned Additional Sessions Judge calls for no interference Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. ( Sabina ) Judge February 18, 2009 arya