Tripura High Court
Saha Alam vs Beauty Akter And Another on 2 May, 2025
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
Crl. Rev. P. No.26 of 2025
Saha Alam
......... Petitioner(s).
VERSUS
Beauty Akter and another
......... Respondent(s).
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hare Krishna Bhowmik, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajib Saha, Addl. Public Prosecutor.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH
Order
02/05/2025
Mr. Rajib Saha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appears
for the respondent-State.
Petitioner was convicted for the commission of offence under
Section 323 of the IPC in a complaint case bearing CR(C) No.03/2022
instituted by respondent No.1 herein vide judgment dated 28.03.2023 passed
by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sepahijala, Sonamoura. But he was
kept under probation instead of undergoing the sentence on execution of a
bond for keeping peace and good behavior for an amount of Rs.10,000/-
only with one surety of like amount for a period of one year under the
supervision of the Probation officer Sonamura, Sepahijala and further
directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- only to the complainant as
compensation under Section 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
The petitioner paid the amount of Rs.1,000/- only to the
complainant as compensation. On one occasion, he failed to observe the
condition of the bond by failing to appear before the Probation Officer. On
the report of the Probation officer, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Sepahijala, remanded him to the judicial custody and thereafter passed an
order directing him to suffer the sentence. He remained in custody for 15
days and thereafter preferred an appeal against the original judgment, being
Criminal Appeal No.8/2023 before the learned District Judge, Sepahijala,
Sonamura. The appeal has been dismissed vide impugned judgment dated
10.04.2025 passed by the learned District Judge, Sepahijala, Sonamura in
Criminal Appeal No.8/2023.
Mr. Hare Krishna Bhowmik, learned counsel for the petitioner,
submits that since it was a first violation of the conditions of the bond, in
terms of Section 9(3)(b), the learned trial Court ought to have imposed a
penalty not exceeding Rs.50/- and to observe the period of probation instead
of directing to suffer the sentence of six months. The bond was also
forfeited.
The learned appellate Court has not appreciated the legal issue
and affirmed the original judgment of conviction of sentence, and therefore,
the petitioner has approached this Court.
Issue notice on the respondent No.1, under ordinary process
and speed post for which requisites be filed within one week.
Notice is made returnable within five weeks.
Since the petitioner has already paid the compensation amount
and has suffered sentence of 15 days out of total six months, the judgment of
the learned trial Court passed in CR (C) No.03/2022 dated 28.03.2023 and
the order of sentence dated 05.12.2023 as affirmed in Criminal Appeal
No.08/2023 by the learned District Judge, Sepahijala, Sonamura dated
10.04.2025 shall remain stayed.
The petitioner is already on bail which is made absolute during
the pendency of the instant revision petition on the same terms.
(APARESH KUMAR SINGH), CJ
Munna S MUNNA SAHA Digitally signed by MUNNA SAHA
Date: 2025.05.05 15:41:19 +05'30'
