Tehsildar And Ors. vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 22213 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:54566
 
Court No. - 29
 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 344 of 2017
 
Revisionist :- Tehsildar And Ors.
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Gyanendra Pathak
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Sharvan Kumar Pandey
 
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

1. Heard Sri Gyanendra Pathak, learned counsel for the revisionists and learned AGA for the State.

2. By means of this criminal revision, the revisionists- Tehsildar, Anokhi and Ram Dheeraj have challenged the order of the trial court dated 05.12.2005 by which they have been convicted for the offence under section 380 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of one year and a fine of Rs. 200/- each as well as the judgment of the appellate court in Criminal Appeal No.18 of 2005 dated 27.03.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Bahraich 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 all the revisionists are farmers and only bread earners in their family; 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.

6. Legally as per the provisions of section- 11 of the 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-Tehsildar, Anokhi and Ram Dheeraj are released on probation under Section- 4 of theProbation of Offenders Act, 1958 for a period of six months 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;

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.

Order Date :- 17.8.2023/Saif