- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the accused appellants.
(2.) In this criminal appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C., the accused appellants are challenging the judgment dated 26.09.1989 passed by the Court of District & Sessions Judge, Sikar (Raj.) in Criminal Case No.25/1988, whereby the trial court convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as under:- Accused Bhagirath and Sultan U/s 323 IPC: Three months simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.50/- and, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 15 days simple imprisonment. Accused Richhpal U/s 323 IPC: Three months simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.25/- and, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 15 days simple imprisonment. Accused Richhpal U/s 324 IPC: Six months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.50/- and, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month imprisonment. Accused Richhpal U/s 326 IPC: Two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.100/- and, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two months simple imprisonment. Sentence awarded to accused Richhpal shall run concurrently.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants is not challenging the impugned judgment on merit and his prayer is that accused appellants-Bhagirath and Sultan may be granted benefit of probation because injured Richpal and the accused appellants belong to same family and now they are living peacefully and the matter is pending since 1989, the sentence awarded to the accused appellant- Richhpal may be reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone, as the accused appellants have remained in judicial custody for sufficient period. Learned counsel in support of has placed reliance upon following judgments:- 1. Mathura Singh and Ors. vs. State of U.P., JT 2009(6)SC 85; 2. Manoj and Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, JT 2008(10) SC 506; and 3. Ishwar Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, JT 2008 (12) SC 104.;