Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J. - (1.) THIS revision has been filed by the petitioners against the judgment dated 28.8.2001 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Bandikui, District Dausa in Criminal Appeal No. 27/2001, whereby he partly allowed the appeal filed by the petitioners and while maintaining the conviction of the petitioners awarded to them by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bandikui vide judgment dated 16.4.2001 passed in Criminal case No. 4/1998, modified the sentence of the accused petitioners as under: - For the offence under Section 148 IPC: To undergo 3 months' SI with fine of Rs. 200/ -; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 month's SI For the offence under Section 323 IPC: To undergo 3 months' SI with a fine of Rs. 200/ -; in default of payment of fine; to further undergo 1 month's SI. Petitioners Madan Lal and Gilya were convicted for the offence under Section 324 IPC, while Rameshwar, Manglya and Kanhaiya were convicted for the offence under Section 324/149 IPC and they were sentenced to undergo 6 months' SI with a fine of Rs. 200/ -; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 month's imprisonment.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that one Kanhaiya Lal lodged a report on 26.11.1997 at Police Station, Bandikui that in the morning at 7.00 AM he and his family members were sitting at their house, then the accused persons came duly armed with Lathi, Barchhi and Kulhadi and caused injuries to them. The police registered FIR No. 703/1997 for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324 and 325 read with Section 149 IPC. After completion of investigation, the police filed the charge sheet against the accused petitioners. The learned trial court framed charges against the accused petitioners, who denied for the same and claimed for trial. The prosecution examined its witnesses before the court below. The statement of the accused petitioners were recorded under Section 313 CrPC. After hearing the arguments of both the sides, the learned trial court passed the impugned judgment dated 16.4.2001 convicting and sentencing the accused petitioners. Against the said judgment dated 16.4.2001, the petitioners filed the appeal. The appellate court, vide judgment dated 28.8.2001 partly allowed the appeal and while modifying the judgment passed by the trial court, convicted and sentenced the accused petitioners, as indicated above. Hence, this revision petition has been filed.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has contended that he is not challenging the conviction part of the judgment of the court below, but he is only requesting to this Court that looking to the nature of allegation and that the matter pertains to the year 1997 which is 16 years ago from today approximately, the accused petitioners are old persons, it is the first offence of their life; the petitioners belong to a respectable family, having a large family dependent upon them; they are not the habitual offenders, they have remained in confinement for more than 7 days; hence either they should be given the benefit of probation under Section 360 CrPC/Probation of Offenders Act and if not, then they should be released for the period already undergone by them in confinement, as indicated here -in -above.;