(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:1)(cid:7)(cid:5)(cid:3)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:3)(cid:13)(cid:10)(cid:2)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:3)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:18)(cid:15)(cid:2)(cid:15)

(cid:15)(cid:4)(cid:3)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:2)(cid:19)(cid:1)(cid:7)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:5)

(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:21) (cid:8)(cid:11)(cid:11)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:24)ti(cid:23)(cid:22)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:27)(cid:9)(cid:17)(cid:28)(cid:29)

(cid:19)(cid:30)(cid:31) (cid:3)!"(cid:3)# $%&%!’((cid:3)(cid:23)(cid:20)(cid:31))(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:30)*$)+(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:20)(cid:24)

(cid:7),*-* (cid:31)(cid:3).%’/) 000(cid:13) (cid:31)%(cid:31)%!’ *

1 *&,&

.(cid:31)(cid:30)(cid:31) (cid:3)!"(cid:3)(cid:13),’2(cid:30)3 (cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)000(cid:11) &-!’# ’(cid:31)

(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:11)(cid:15)(cid:28)((cid:3) (cid:5)(cid:9)(cid:2)4(cid:16)5(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:11).0(cid:3)(cid:14)(cid:10).(cid:4)(cid:1)(cid:8)(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:15)(cid:2)(cid:1).(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:16)(cid:15)(cid:4)(cid:11)(cid:15)

Present: Mr. Vishavjeet Singh Rishi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Himani Arora, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.

***

(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:15)(cid:2)(cid:1).(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:16)(cid:15)(cid:4)(cid:11)(cid:15)+(cid:3)(cid:14)0(cid:3)(cid:3)(Oral)(cid:3)

1. The instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dated 22.11.2018, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Samrala (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’) in case titled as (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:2)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:5)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16), arising out of FIR No. 87 dated 30.06.2016, registered under Sections 323, 325 and 506 of IPC at Police Station Machhiwara Sahib, District Ludhiana, whereby the petitioner was held guilty and convicted for commission of aforementioned offences and was sentenced to undergo maximum rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year with default clause. He also challenged the judgment dated 18.07.2024, passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as ‘appellate Court’) in Criminal Appeal No. 1000 of 2018, titled as (cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:5)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:2)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:5)(cid:19)(cid:10)(cid:14)(cid:20)(cid:3)(cid:21), whereby(cid:3)the appeal filed by the petitioner had been dismissed.

2. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in compliance with order dated 12.12.2024, passed by this Court, the petitioner has deposited the amount of Rs.50,000/8 with the trial Court and he has been released on interim bail. It is further submitted that in compliance with the aforesaid order, the parties had appeared before the Mediator at Ludhiana and an amicable settlement has arrived at between them, vide report dated 05.03.2025 submitted by the Nodal Officer of the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Ludhiana. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he did not press the present petition on its merits and restricts his argument to the extent that benefit of probation be granted to the petitioner. Hence, the sole consideration before this Court is as to whether the prayer made by the petitioner for extending him benefit of probation can be accepted or not?

3. As mentioned above, the petitioner had been guilty for commission of offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 506 of IPC. The appellate Court had also dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. Since then much water has flown under the bridge. The petitioner herein is facing rigors of litigation from the las