Allahabad High Court
Anil Vimal And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 10 August, 2023
Bench: Jyotsna Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:53162
Court No. - 29
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 870 of 2023
Revisionist :- Anil Vimal And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow
Counsel for Revisionist :- Prabhu Ranjan Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
1. Heard Sri Prabhu Ranjan Tripathi, learned counsel for the revisionists and Sri S.P. Tiwari, learned AGA for the State.
2. By means of this criminal revision, the revisionists-Anil Vimal and Ashish Kumar have challenged the order of the trial court by which they have been convicted for the offence under section 411 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of one year and six months and a fine of Rs. 2,500/- as well as the judgment of the appellate court in criminal appeal no. 180 of 2017 dated 28.06.2023 passed by VIIIth Additional Sessions Judge affirming the aforesaid order of the trial court.
3. It is contended on behalf of the revisionists that they do not seek to challenge the order of conviction but they are presently challenging the order of sentence.
4. It is contended that this has been a fit case for application of the relevant provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, however the learned trial court as well as the appellate court have not assigned any reasons for not applying the provisions of sections 3 and 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958; it is contended that both the revisionists have a very bright future and once they are imprisoned, their future shall be jeopardized; the learned counsel for the revisionists further submits that they are not the previous convicts and this is their first offence; it is further argued that in the nature and circumstances of the matter they deserved the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 but the same has been denied for no reasons.
5. Perusal of the papers shows that the revisionists have been convicted under section 411 IPC and sentenced to undergo a maximum punishment of one year and six months and a fine of Rs. 2,500/-
6. Legally as per the provisions of section 11 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, the power of the trial court may be exercised by competent appellate court or the revisional court.
7. The learned AGA has not put any fact or material before me which could justify denial of benefit of the provisions of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
8. On the basis of above discussions, while upholding the conviction the revision is disposed of by modifying the sentencing part as below:-
(i) the accused revisionists-Anil Vimal and Ashish Kumar are released on probation under Section 4 of theProbation of Offenders Act, 1958 for a period of one year from today;
(ii) for the above purpose the accused revisionists shall file two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each and personal bonds of the same amount before the court concerned within a period of two weeks from today;
(iii) during the probation period they shall not indulge in any anti-social and criminal activities and shall keep peace in society;
(iv) the revisionists shall pay Rs. 10,000/- each, to the owner of the vehicle and the same shall be deposited in the court concerned within a period of two weeks from today for payment to the person concerned.
9. In case of breach of any of the said condition, the accused-revisionists will subject themselves to undergo the sentence as prescribed by the trial court.
10. Let the copy of this judgment as well as the lower court record, if received, be transmitted to the concerned Trial Court forthwith for necessary compliance.
11. The court concerned shall intimate as to compliance of the aforesaid terms and conditions. The amount of Rs. 10,000/- deposited by each one of the accused revisionists shall be payable to the owner of the vehicle and the court concerned shall take necessary steps for the same.
Order Date :- 10.8.2023
*Vikram*
