Criminal appeal against conviction for offenses under IPC 452, 354, 323 and SC/ST Act 3(1)(11). Court upheld trial court's verdict, finding prosecution evidence cogent and sufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, affirming conviction and probation order.
Impugned judgment of conviction and probation order affirmed; appeal dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2023:RJ-JD:24622
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 449/1994
----Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.D.S.S. Kharlia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Purohit, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Judgment
Judgment pronounced on : 03/08/2023
Judgment reserved on : 25/07/2023
By the Court :
[CRLA-449/1994]
2023:RJ-JD:24622
(2 of 7)
sum of Rs.3,000/- alongwith a surety in the like amount. Each of the appellant was further ordered to deposit a sum of Rs.500/- as prosecution expenses and appellant Banwari Lal was ordered to deposit a sum of Rs.1000/- as compensation to be provided to the complainant.
[CRLA-449/1994]
2023:RJ-JD:24622
(3 of 7)
a charge-sheet came to be filed against Banwari Lal and Makhan Singh for the offences under Section 452, 354, 323 IPC and Section 3 of the SC/ST Act before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Raisinghnagar, from where the case was committed and transferred to the trial court.
[CRLA-449/1994]
2023:RJ-JD:24622
(4 of 7)
appellant Banwari Lal from the charge under Section 354 of the IPC read with Section 3(1)(11) of the SC/ST Act and appellant Makhan Singh from the charges under Sections 354 and 323 of the IPC, however, convicted them for the offences mentioned above and granted them the benefit of probation under Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, the appellants have preferred the instant appeal.
[CRLA-449/1994]
2023:RJ-JD:24622
(5 of 7)
him, the trial court was absolutely justified in convicting the appellants by the impugned judgment. There was no reason for the complainant and other witnesses to falsely implicate the appellant. Despite convicting the appellants, the learned trial curt has already taken a lenient view by not sending them to jail and granting them the benefit of probation. On basis of these submissions, learned Public Prosecutor implored the court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the impugned judgment.
[CRLA-449/1994]
2023:RJ-JD:24622
(6 of 7)
(P.W.5), nephew of Madan Lal gave statement on the same lines. Jangir Singh (P.W.7) is an independent witness, who stated that he saw Banwari Lal and Makhan Singh coming out of the house of the complainant at 09-10 o'clock in the night of incident. Based on the statements of the witnesses P.W.1 to P.W.6, which find further corroboration from the testimony of independent witnesses Jangir Singh (P.W.7), the learned trial court came to the conclusion that in the night of the incident, the appellants trespassed into the house of the complainant armed with lathis and gandasis, thus, the offence under Section 452 of IPC is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
(7 of 7)
[CRLA-449/1994]
2023:RJ-JD:24622
careful scrutiny of the same does not give rise to any suspicion over their truthfulness specially when the same is further corroborated by other material available on record. In the considered opinion of this court, the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt by producing cogent and unimpeachable evidence. The learned trial court has prudently discussed the entire evidence in detail and based upon thorough appreciation of the same has reached to the conclusion of guilt of the appellant. Further, even after convicting the appellant, a lenient view has been taken and instead of sentencing them to suffer imprisonment, benefit of probation has been given to them. I find no error, irregularity or illegality in the impugned judgment of conviction and order of probation, which may call for interference in this appeal.
(FARJAND ALI),J
Pramod/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether prosecution evidence is cogent and unimpeachable to convict appellants for offenses under Sections 452, 354, and 323 of IPC.
Whether the trial court was justified in granting probation to convicted appellants without committing irregularity.
Whether the acquittal of Makhan Singh from Section 323 charge based on medical evidence依法 justified for convincing different injuries.
7 provisions across 4 enactments
Banwari Lal
Makhan Singh
State of Rajasthan
Farjand Ali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
