1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. ORDER Smt. Kewal Vs. The State of Rajasthan & ors. SB CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.26/2007. Under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. DATE OF ORDER: 19th August, 2008. PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. PATHAK Mr. Praveen Jain for the petitioner. Mrs.Nirmala Sharma PP for the State. Mr. Chetan Jain for the respondents. BY THE COURT: This revision petition has been filed under Section 397 read with section 401 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 3rd November, 2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Tonk in Criminal Case No.6/2005 (4/2005) whereby the accused respondents were acquitted for the offence under sections 452, 323, 427 and 342 IPC and convicted for the offence under sections 147, 336 read with 149 IPC and granted the benefit of the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned trial court has committed grave illegality in acquitting the accused respondents from the charges framed against them under sections 452, 323, 427 and 342 IPC. It is contended that the learned trial court has not properly appreciated 2 the evidence and the accused-respondents were liable to be convicted. The facts for disposal of this revision petition are that after trial of the case, the accused-respondents were acquitted for the offence under sections 452, 323, 427 and 342 IPC and were convicted for the offence under sections 147, 336 read with 149 IPC and instead of sentencing them under the aforesaid sections of the Indian Penal Code, benefit of the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act was granted to them. It is to be seen that Smt. Kewal wife of Banney Singh lodged a report in the concerned police station that on the day of incident while she along with her husband was sitting in their house in the noon, the accused came there having lathis in their hand and gave beating to them. On this report, first information report No.92/2005 (Ex.P-13) was registered and after investigation charge-sheet was filed and after trial the accused-respondents were convicted under sections 147 and 336 r/w 149 IPC and acquitted from the offence under sections 452, 323, 427 and 342 IPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out any illegality in appreciation of the evidence that may require interference by this court under its revisional jurisdiction. The accused-respondents were convicted and instead of sentencing them benefit of provisions of Probation of Offenders Act was given and in my opinion rightly the learned trial court has given the 3 benefit to the accused-respondents because no previous conviction has been found against the accused respondents and the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act are mandatory in nature. The revision petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the revision petition stands dismissed. (S.P. PATHAK,J) BBLM