1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER S.B.CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 755/2007 (Lakhma & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) Date of Order : 07.08.2007 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. L.R.Choudhary for the petitioners. BY THE COURT:- By the instant criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., the petitioners complainant have challenged the judgment and order dated 24.4.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Bhinmal (for short 'the appellate court' hereinafter) whereby the appeal filed by the respondents No.2 to 5 against the judgment and order dated 29.3.2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhinmal (for short 'the trial court' hereinafter) was partly allowed and while altering the conviction of the accused respondents from Section 452 IPC to Section 451 IPC and maintaining the conviction for the offences under Sections 325/34 and 323 IPC, the appellate court 2 instead of sentencing the accused-respondents at once to any imprisonment, released them on probation under Section 4 (1) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) provided each of the accused respondents furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court to maintain peace and tranquility and be of good behaviour for a period of one year and shall not repeat such offences during this period. The appellate court also awarded compensation under Section 5 of the Act and directed each of the accused respondents to deposit prosecution expenses @ Rs. 2000/- totalling to Rs. 8000/- and on such deposit, a sum of Rs. 2000/- was directed to be paid to injured petitioner Lakhma, Rs. 1500/- to injured Smt. Dheli and Rs. 1000/- each to injured Amiya and Jamna. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners at length. Carefully gone through the judgment and order impugned passed by the appellate court as also the judgment and order passed by the trial court. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the appellate court fell in error in altering the conviction from Section 452 IPC to Section 451 IPC. 3 It appears from the judgment and order impugned that two independent eye witnesses namely PW-9 Smt. Falu and PW-10 Mohabbatsingh were neighbours, they have stated that the occurrence took place in the 'Aangan' Courtyard. Be that as it may, from the material available on record and on re- appreciation of the evidence, the appellate court held that the occurrence took place in 'Aangan' courtyard and therefore, finding that no essential ingredients of the offence under Section 452 IPC are made out, altered the conviction from Section 452 IPC to Section 451 IPC. This part of the finding of the appellate court cannot be said to be suffering from any error or illegality. The appellate court has maintained the conviction of the accused respondents for the offence under Sections 323 and 325/34 IPC. The appellate court has also taken care of awarding compensation. However, in my view, out of Rs.8000/- directed to be deposited by the accused respondents, the appellate court directed to pay only a sum of Rs. 5500/- in all to the injured persons. The order impugned therefore, deserves to be modified to the extent that out of Rs.8000/-, a sum of Rs.4000/- be paid to PW-2 injured Lakhma, Rs. 2000/- to PW-3 injured Smt. Dheli and Rs. 1000/- each to PW-4 Amiya and PW-8 Jamna. Accordingly, the order impugned dated 24.4.2007 passed by the appellate court is modified to the extent that out 4 of Rs.8000/-, a sum of Rs.4000/- be paid to PW-2 injured Lakhma, Rs. 2000/- to PW-3 injured Smt. Dheli and Rs. 1000/- each to PW-4 Amiya and PW-8 Jamna. With this modification, the revision petition stands disposed of. (H.R.PANWAR),J. rp