Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/3 vs The State Of Assam on 26 May, 2025
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010219612012
2025:GAU-AS:6612
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./365/2012
MD. JAFAR ALI @ JAFAR ALI
S/O AFSAR ALI R/O VILL- PALASHBARI, P.O. and P.S. BAGOWAN, DIST.
GOALPARA, ASSAM,
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S SINHA, MS. R CHOUDHURY (AMICUS CURIAE),MR. S B
PRASAD
Advocate for the Respondent : , PP, ASSAM
:: PRESENT ::
HON'BLEMR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTISAIKIA
For the Petitioner : Ms. R. Choudhury,
Amicus Curiae.
For the Respondent: Mr. P. Borthakur,
Addl. P.P., Assam.
Date of Hearing : 22.05.2025.
Date of Judgment : 26.05.2025.
Page No.# 2/3
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)
Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the petitioner.
Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.
2. This is an application under Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC)
challenging the judgment dated 24.01.2012 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional
Judicial Magistrate(S), Goalpara in G.R. Case No.23/2010 affirmed by learned the
judgment dated 29.06.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Goalpara in C.A.
No.26/2012.
3. In the year 2009, the present petitioner married the Respondent No.2. At the
instigation of other family members, the present petitioner mentally and physically
harassed his wife. Ultimately, she was driven out of her matrimonial house. She filed a
complaint petition in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Goalpara. The same
was forwarded to police. Accordingly, police registered a case and after investigation,
filed a charge sheet against the present petitioner under Section 498-A of the Indian
Penal Code.
4. The trial court framed the charge under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.
5. During the trial, the prosecution side examined 5 witnesses. The petitioner did
not examine any defence witness. On the basis of the evidence on record, the trial
court found the petitioner to be guilty and convicted him under Section 498-A of the
Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of
1(one) year and was also directed to a fine of ₹500/-.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides.
7. Being a revisional court, this Court has decided not to enter into the prosecution
evidence. This Court is of the opinion that the trial court never considered the
case of the petitioner under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or under
the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act.
Page No.# 3/3
8. Whenever a trial court makes a decision not to consider the case of the convict
under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or under the provisions of the
Probation of Offenders Act, the trial court is bound to give a reasoning. In the case in
hand, this was not done.
9. For the aforesaid reason, the part of the impugned judgment whereby the
petitioner was sentenced to undergo one year imprisonment and to pay a fine of
₹500/-, is set aside. This Court hereby allows the petitioner Md. Jafar Ali @ Jafar Ali to
go after admonition.
With the aforesaid direction, the Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of.
Send back the LCR.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
