HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4886 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of revisionist is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel appearing for opp. party nos. 2 and 3 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present revision has been filed against the order and judgment dated 12.7.2024 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Gorakhpur. The said order has been passed in respect of the judgment dated 18.10.2023 wherein, an appeal was filed challenging the order dated 18.10.2023 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (SD), II/A.C.J.M., Gorakhpur, 4. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that, while passing the judgment dated 12.07.2024, the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge has ignored the injuries sustained by the mother and wife of the revisionist and therefore, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge has not only ignored the said fact, but also did not consider the gravity of the injuries. Looking into the injury report and the nature of the injuries, the order of conviction has been passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (SD)/ A.C.J.M., Gorakhpur, under Section 325 I.P.C., therefore, the order dated 12.07.2024 is liable to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for opp. party nos. 2 and 3 submits that after due consideration of the facts, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge concerned has acquitted the opp. party nos. 2 and 3 in respect of Section 325 I.P.C. and extended the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, in respect of sections 323, 504 I.P.C. 6. Having regard to the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties and without going into the merits of the case, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, while passing the impugned order has categorically stated that the accused persons are acquitted under Section 325 I.P.C. but thereafter simply stated that the accused persons i.e. opp. party nos. 2 and 3 are entitled to obtain benefit of the Section 4 of the Probation of offenders Act and is silent in respect of Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C., though the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge in the preceding Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Bhriguram Ji, Shashi Shekhar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pramod Kumar Singh, Vijendra Kumar Mishra Ashok .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) paragraph has held that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the charges against the accused persons in respect of Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C. but in operating part of the judgment has merely extended the benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, without disclosing as to in respect of which Section 323 I.P.C. or 324 I.P.C. or in both sections i.e. 324 and 504 I.P.C., the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act was extended to opp. party nos. 2 and 3. 7. Since the quantum of punishment invites criminal implications and while passing any judgment and order the court, should be explicitly clear and unambiguous in respect of every section, as to whether, under which Section the accused has been acquitted and under which Section the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act is extended. The same is not clear, in the present case. 8. Under the circumstances of the case, the judgment and order dated 12.07.2024 is set aside to that extent, as stated above and learned Additional District and Sessions Judge concerned is directed to pass the order afresh clearly indicating under which section/s (323 I.P.C. or 504 I.P.C. or both) the benefit of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act is extended to the accused persons, opp. party nos. 2 and 3 herein. 9. The revision is allowed to the extent as stated above. September 24, 2025 Gss CRLR No. 4886 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad