- (1.) S. C. Jain, J. The facts given rise to this revision petition are that in case filed by Smt. Arti Panchpuri five persons, namely, Deena Nath, Nirmal Kumar, Vimal Kumar, Smt. Prem Devi and Smt. Sadhna Devi were convicted and sentenced under Section 498-A, I. P. C. Smt. Prema Devi and Smt. Sadhna Devi, opposite party Nos. 4 and 5 respectively, were released on probation under the U. P. First Offenders' Probation Act, whereas the remaining three opposite parties, namely, Deena Nath, Nirmal Kumar and Vimal Kumar, were sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 each and in default of payment of fine to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment.
(2.) FEELING aggrieved, all the five persons filed an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, i. e. Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 1989, challenging the order of the trial court. The learned Sessions Judge also gave the benefit of Section 4 of the U. P. First Offenders' Probation Act to the three opposite parties, i. e. Deena Nath, Nirmal Kumar and Vimal Kumar and ordered for their release on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs. 2,000 each with one surety in the like amount for keeping peace and be of good behaviour for a period of two years. The fine amount of Rs. 800 each has already been deposited by all the three opposite parties, i. e. Deena Nath, Nirmal Kumar and Vimal Kumar, in court. In this revision before this court the learned counsel for the revi sionist, Smt. Arti Panohpuri, now does not challenge the order giving the benefit of Section 4 of the U. P. First Offenders' Probation Act but he only claims that the fine amount of Rs. 1500 which was allegedly deposited by the three opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3 be ordered to be paid to her (Smt. Arti Panchpuri) as she has suffered a lot. He relied upon the decision of Supreme Court, Hari Singh v. Sukhbir Singh, AIR 1968 (SC) p. 2127 and also upon the decree of S. C. in Maharaj Bux Singh v. The State, 1989 ALJ p. 617 in support of his contention. The learned counsel for the opposite parties has got no objection if the fine amount mentioned above is ordered to be paid to Smt. Arti Panchpuri wife of Nirmal Kumar Panchpuri. Keeping in view the circumstances explained the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge on 27-2- 1991 is hereby maintained as far as giving the benefit of Section 4 of the U. P. First Offenders' Probation Act is concerned, but his order is modified to the extent that the fine amount of Rs. 1500 (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) if lying deposited in the trial court be paid to Smt. Arti Panchpuri wife of Nirmai Kumar Panchpuri daughter of Sri Bhagwati Prasad resident of Dhyani Patti Kandwalayun, district Pauri Garhwal and the revision is allowed to this extent only.
(3.) WITH these observations the revision petition stands disposed of finally. Revision disposed of. .;