Gauhati High Court
Kuldeep Das And 4 Ors vs State Of Assam And Anr on 3 June, 2020
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010161402011
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Rev.P. 313/2011
1:KULDEEP DAS and 4 ORS
S/O LT. RATNESWAR DAS R/O VILL- BELTOLA, P.O. BALADHMARI, P.S. and
DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM.
2: SRI NOBI HUSSAIN
S/O LT. ANOWAR HUSSAIN R/O VILL- NAYAPARA P.O. and DIST.
GOALPARA
ASSAM.
3: SRI ANUP KUMAR SARMA
S/O LT. ANIL SARMA R/O VILL- SANTINAGAR P.O. BALADMARI DIST.
GOALPARA
ASSAM.
4: SRI SURESH DAS
S/O LT. PURNA CH DAS R/O BALADHMARI DIST. GOALPARA
ASSAM.
5: SRI NOBI HUSSAIN
S/O LT. SAIYED ALI R/O VILL- AMBARI
P.O. and DIST. GOALPARA
ASSAM
VERSUS
1:STATE OF ASSAM and ANR.
2:MD SAHJAHAN ALI
S/O FALJUDDIN
VILL- HELAPATHRI
P.S. MORNOI
DIST. GOALPARA
ASSAM. PIN- 783101
Page No.# 2/3
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A BHATTACHARYA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI
ORDER
Date : 03-06-2020 Heard Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned Sr. counsel for the revision petitioners and Mr. D. Das, learned Addl. P.P. for the State/respondent.
2. Challenge in this revision petition is to the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Goalpara in Crl. Appeal No. 13/2011, whereby learned Sessions Judge having upheld and confirmed the conviction of the petitioner u/s 323/448 IPC, awarded sentence of fine Rs. 1,000/- each u/s 323 IPC and fine of Rs. 300/- u/s 448 IPC.
3. As per prosecution case, on 18-06-2009 at about 10.30 am, when the complainant was thrashing his paddy, the petitioners trespassed into his house and assaulted him thereby causing injuries. A complaint was lodged by the respondent No. 2, whereupon the learned Magistrate took cognizance and issued process and on conclusion of trial recorded conviction of the petitioner u/s 323/448 IPC and awarded sentence as indicated above. Mr. Mahanta, learned senior counsel has not contested the findings of the learned trial court as well as the appellate court holding the petitioners guilty of committing offence u/s 448/323 IPC. However, learned Sr. counsel Mr. Mahanta submits that the petitioners are Govt. servants and they don't have any criminal antecedent and prays for giving the benefit of Probation of the Offenders Act.
4. On perusal of the evidence and materials brought on record, this Court is of the view that the findings of the learned courts below holding the petitioner guilty of committing offence u/s 323/448 IPC was quite reasonable and did not suffer from any infirmity requiring interference by this Court. Though the offences were not of serious nature and there was also no material on record to show that the petitioners were habitual offenders, Page No.# 3/3 or they have any criminal antecedent, neither the trial court, nor the appellate court invoked the provision of Probation of the Offenders Act and no reason was also shown as to why the provision of probation of the Offenders Act was not applied. Evidently the occurrence took place in the year 2009 and the petitioner have suffered a lot due to protacted trial for about 11 years. There is also no adverse material on record, which can be taken into consideration for not invoking the provision of Probation of the Offenders Act. Therefore, having considered the trivial nature of offences and the facts and circumstances, under which the occurrence took place, I am of the considered view, that this is a fit case, where the petitioners should be given the benefit of the probation of Offenders Act. Accordingly, the sentence awarded by the learned courts below is hereby set aside and the petitioners are directed to be released on probation u/s 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act.
5. The petitioners shall appear before the learned trial court within three months and upon appearance of the petitioner, the learned trial court shall pass an appropriate order for releasing the petitioner on probation u/s 4 of the Offenders Act. It is made clear that in the event of releasing the petitioners on probation, they shall be entitled to the protection of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act.
6. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.
7. Send back the record along with a copy of this order.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant