YADAV, J. - (1.) BRIEF facts giving rise to the present revision petition are that P. W. 2 Vallabh Das, Head Master of Rajkiya Uchh Prathmik Vidhyalaya, Ghata, Tehsil Kelwada lodged a written F. I. R. at police station Kelwada in 14. 9. 1977 stating therein that when he was teaching the students of VIIIth standard at about 1. 30 P. M. accused petitioner No. 1 Madhu Das and accused petitioner No. 2 his son Mithudas entered in the premises of the school and started to abuse him and other teachers of the school. Hearing the hue and cry made by the revisionists No. l and 2, he come out of his class room and asked from Madhudas as to why he is making hue and cry in the school premises. According to First Information Report, accused revisionists No. l Madhudas in abusive language stated that Mohan Balai, who is student of class Vth, has beaten his daughter. The complainant-Head Master asked from Mohan Balai, student of class Vth, as to why he had beaten the daughter of revisionist No. l-Madhudas. During the course of inquiry by the Head Master, Mohan Balai, student of class Vth, informed to him that he had gone to urinate after seeking permission from the teacher-Hem Singh (P. W. I) out-side the boundary wall of the school where he was beaten by the accused-revisionist No. 2 Mithu Das. Hearing the hue and cry made by the revisionists No. l and 2, all the teachers of the school collected and started to pacify accused-petitioners No. l and 2 not to abuse the Head Master and other teachers in the school premises. Meantime, revisionist No. 3 Bhanwar Lal came on the spot and all the accused persons abused, humiliated and beaten the Head Master and interfered in the discharge of his official duty.
(2.) ON the aforesaid written information, a case was registered at Police Station Kelwada under sections 332, 353 and 506 I. P. C. and F. I. R. Ex. P. 2 was drawn. After investigation, the Police submitted charge-sheet against three accused persons before the Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh. On the basis of the charge-sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer, the learned Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate Kumbhalgarh framed charges against the accused-revisionists who pleaded not guilty. In support of the case, the prosecution examined P. W. I Hem Singh, P. W. 2 Vallabh Das, P. W. 3 Laxmi Narain, P. W. 4 Sardar Singh, P. W. 5 Ekling Nath, P. W. 6 Manohar, P. W. 7 Umar Bahadur Khan, P. W. 8 Varda, P. W. 9 Abhay Singh, P. W. 10 Vijayendra Kumar, P. W. ll Saroop and P. W. 12 Shiv Ram. The prosecution has also submitted documentary evidence Ex. p. l to Ex. P. 6 in support of prosecution story. After trial, the learned Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh held on 01. 06. 1984 that the revisionists No. 1,2 and 3 are guilty of offence under section 332 l. P. C. and after giving fresh opportunity of hearing on question of sentence, convicted and sentencefl each of the revisionists under section 332 l. P. C for 6 months R. I. and Rs. 300/-fine to each accused-revisionists. In default of payment, each accused-revisionists were ordered to undergo 2 months' R. I. In case fine is deposited, Rs. 500/- was directed by the learned Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate to be paid to the complainant Head Master (P. W. 2) as compensation. It is also held by the learned Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate that the accused-revisionists were in jail during trial, therefore, the period during which they were in jail during trial will be reduced from the substantive sentence.
(3.) AGAINST their conviction and sentence dated 01. 06. 1984 passed by the learned Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh, the present revisionists preferred an appeal before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rajsamand. The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rajsamand, dismissed the appeal of the revisionists No. 1,2 and 3 on 06. 05. 1985. The revisionists being aggrieved with their conviction and sentence passed by the courts below, preferred this revision petition before this court under section 397/401 Cr. P. C. I have heard the learned counsel for the revisionists as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. ;