Mangu Oraon vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 338 Jhar

                                 1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    Cr. Revision No. 281 of 2011
                                  -------

1. Mangu Oraon

2. Sukra Oraon

3. Krishna Oraon

4. Chandradeo Oraon

5. Inder Oraon @ Hira Oraon

6. Angni Orain

7. Munita Orain ..... .... Petitioners Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Sukru Oraon ..... ....Opposite Parties

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

-------

For the Petitioner :Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party :Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, APP .........

05/19.01.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This revision application is directed against the judgment dated 19.1.2011 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Lohardaga in Criminal Appeal No.33 of 2010; whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.8.2010 passed by the learned SDJM, Lohardaga, in complaint case No.142/06; whereby the petitioners were convicted for the offence under Sections 147 & 379 IPC and were directed to be released on probation bond after entering into a bond of Rs.5000/- with two sureties of like amount each for keeping peace and good behavior for a period of one year ; has been affirmed and the appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the court below has sentence to the extent that the petitioners were directed to be released under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act after entering into a bond of Rs.5000/- with two sureties of like amount each for keeping peace and good behavior for a period of one year. However, the petitioners did not furnish the said probation bonds and filed the criminal revision before this Court and the said period has already been expired and no adverse report has been received during the probation period; as such he confines his prayer and prays that that sentence may be modified by exempting the petitioners to file probation bonds.

4. Learned counsel for the State supported the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners and admits that no adverse report has been received during the probation period and after a long period now filing of probation bonds is not required.

5. In view of the aforesaid facts, without going into merit of the case, since the period of probation bond has already expired and after a long period filing of probation bonds will be mere formality; thus, after lapse of 13 years petitioners are hereby exempted from filing of probation bond, inasmuch as, no adverse report has been received within the probation period. Accordingly, the instant application, is hereby, disposed of with the aforesaid modification.

6. Let the lower court record be sent to the court concerned forthwith.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

Fahim/-