Rajinder Singh vs State
1996 Latest Caselaw 979 Del

JUDGMENT

S.K. Mahajan, J.

(1) By judgment dated 24th November, 1993, the Additional Sessions Judge while convicting the appellant of the offence under Sections 394/34 Indian Penal Code read with Section 397 Indian Penal Code, sentenced him to undergo Ri for seven years and also imposed a fine of Rs.2,000.00 and in default of the payment of fine to undergo further Ri for a period of six months. The appellant was in detention for a period of about eight months during trial and is in jail since the date of his conviction. While the learned counsel for the appellant has not challenged the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge finding him guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 394/34 Indian Penal Code read with Section 397 Indian Penal Code, the only point raised before me is that the appellant was of the age of 19 years on the date of commission of offence and he should have, therefore, been given the benefit of Section 6 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (in short referred to as the Act).

(2) The appellant has placed on record the copy of the admission card of the All-India Secondary School Examination showing the date of birth of the appellant as 1.1.1968. The offence for which the appellant has been found guilty was committed on 31st March, 1987 and the appellant, therefore, admittedly was of the age of 19 years and 3 months as on the date of commission of offence. Under Section 6 of the Act, when any person under 21 years of age is found guilty of having committed an offence punishable with imprisonment (but not with imprisonment for life), the Court by which the person is found guilty shall not sentence him to imprisonment unless it is satisfied that, having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender, it would not be desirable to deal with him under Section 3 or 4, and if the Court passes any sentence of imprisonment of the offender, it shall record its reasons for doing so. Under sub-Section 2 of the Section 6 of the Act, for the purposes of satisfying as to whether it would not be desirable to deal under Section 3 or Section 4 with an offender, the Court shall call for a report from the Probation Officer and consider the report and any other information available to it relating to the character and physical and mental condition of the offender.

(3) It appears that the provisions of the Act were not brought to the notice of the learned Additional Sessions Judge or he was not informed about the age of the offender and that may be the reason that there is no discussion in the judgment about the petitioner not being given the benefit of the Act. After the matter was argued in this Court, a report was obtained from the Probation Officer in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Probation Officer has since filed his report and I am impressed with the same.

(4) The report is based upon the personal interview of the Probation Officer with the appellant, visit to his previous residence and talks with the neighbourers as well as record from the police station, etc. As per the report, the petitioner has a widowed mother, one younger brother and two married sisters. He is a matriculate having passed his matriculation examination in 1987 through correspondence from the Delhi Board of Secondary Education. He worked on commission basis with some private company for six/seven months and seemed to be a well-behaved person. He was not used to smoking or drinking. His temperament was found to be mild and sophisticated and he appeared to be much depressed with his life. His mother lives in the native village and is engaged in cultivation. The appellant does not have much information about his younger brother. The elder sister was married in 1991 while the younger was married in 1993. Except that his mother had come to see him in jail about 9/10 months back, the appellant has no contacts with his relations. The appellant is a first offender and it was due to the parental negligence that he fell in the company of unwanted elements, namely, the co-accused who used to live in the same area. They had a scuffle with a two seater rickshaw driver over payment. He was robbed by the appellant and his co-accused of a ten rupee note. The appellant belongs to a low income family, his father was a class 'D' employee in the Home Ministry and he has no other case against him. As per the report of the Probation Officer, the appellant has got matured during three and a half years of imprisonment and admits that he was in the bad company. He seems to be improving considerably after the imprisonment. He appears to be repentant about the offence and there seem to be ample chances of his improving and bearing family responsibilities of his old mother. The Probation Officer has recommended that in case the Court deems fit he may be considered to be given the benefit of the Act so that he may live in the society under supervision for some time.

(5) The appellant is a young man coming from a lower middle class family. Though he has passed his secondary examination, however, due to the parental negligence, he came under the influence of unwanted elements but he seems to be improving considerably after the punishment and is repentant about the offence and as per the report of the Probation Officer, he has improved considerably. Therefore, having regard to the nature of the offence, the character and mental condition of the offender and his behaviour in jail and the facts and circumstances revealed in the report of the Probation Officer, I feel it to be a fit case to grant the benefit of the Act to the appellant.

(6) Therefore, giving the appellant the benefit of the Act, I suspend his sentence and direct that he be released on his entering into a bond, with one surety of Rs.5,000.00 , to appear and receive the unexpired portion of the sentence when called upon during the period of two years from the date of entering into the bond and in the meantime he shall keep peace and be of good behaviour. The surety shall be of Delhi and shall be furnished to the satisfaction of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. At the time of taking bond, the appellant should be informed about his keeping good behaviour and peace. During the period of bond, the Probation Officer will keep supervision over the appellant. Appeal is allowed to this extent.

(7) Copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent, Jail for compliance and necessary action at his end.