Himachal Pradesh High Court
Jai Kumar vs State Of H.P on 15 December, 2023
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Cr. Revision No. 257 of 2011
Decided on: 15th December, 2023
.
Jai Kumar .......Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P ...Respondent
Coram
of
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner:
rt Petitioner in person with Mr.
Varun Rana, Advocate.
For the respondent: Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Addl. A.G.
and Ms. Leena Guleria, Dy. A.G.
Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)
Petitioner has filed the present revision petition, against the judgment, dated 30.08.2011, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the 'First Appellate Court'), in Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 2007, titled as 'Jai Kumar versus State of H.P'.
2. Vide judgment, dated 30.08.2011, the learned First Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal, filed by the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the convict'), under 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2023 20:32:13 :::CIS 2Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.'), against the .
judgment of conviction dated 11.10.2007 and order of sentence, dated 12.10.2007, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court') in of Police Challan No. 125-I/2006/116-II/2006, titled as State of H.P. vs. Jai Kumar.
3. rt By virtue of judgment of conviction and order of sentence, as referred-to-above, the learned trial Court has convicted the convict, for the commission of offences, punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the commission of offence punishable under Section 341 IPC, to undergo simple imprisonment for four months for the commission of offence punishable under Section 323 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the commission of offence punishable under Section 325 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment fine under Sections 323 and 325 IPC, the convict shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one ::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2023 20:32:13 :::CIS 3 month, respectively. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
.
4. Vide order, dated 21.11.2023, this Court has ordered to call for the report of the Probation Officer. In sequel thereto, the report of the Probation Officer has been received.
of
5. Today, statement of the convict has been recorded on oath, in which, he has stated that he does not want to rt press the present petition, preferred against the judgment of conviction and prayed that he may be released on probation.
6. The report of the Probation Officer perused.
7. Perusal of the record shows that the convict is the first offender and the offences committed by him are not premeditated one.
8. The Probation Officer has specifically mentioned that the conduct of the convict, during past years, in the society, is good and has recommended that the benefit under Probation of Offenders Act be given to him.
9. The offences, for which, the convict has been convicted, are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The convict is having the permanent abode in District Mandi (Himachal Pradesh), as per the report of the Probation ::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2023 20:32:13 :::CIS 4 Officer. There is nothing on the file to demonstrate that after the incident, upon which, the FIR was registered against the .
convict, any other incident, had taken place and no subsequent offence has been committed by him.
10. The convict has already faced the agony of the trial, including the pendency of the trial, for the last eighteen of years.
11. Our Criminal Jurisprudence System is rt reformatory in nature. With the passage of time, it has been realized that sending the first offender to jail, to undergo substantive sentence, does not produce good results, as, the first offender/convict, sometimes, may come in contact with the hardened criminals.
12. The probation is a kind of non-custodial sentence, by giving an opportunity to the convict to reform himself/herself, while abiding by certain conditions, imposed by the Court, for a certain period. It is a reformatory measure to achieve the object, by giving an opportunity to the convict, to reform himself/herself, instead of directing him/her to undergo substantive sentence.
13. While, not pressing his revision petition, against the judgment of conviction, the convict, has prayed that he be ::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2023 20:32:13 :::CIS 5 released on probation. Rejecting the prayer of the convict to release him on probation, would amount to punishing his .
family members, for the offences, committed by the convict.
14. Considering the nature of the offence, this Court is of the view that it would be expedient to release the convict on probation of good conduct, instead of directing him to of undergo substantive sentence, as imposed by the learned trial Court.
15. rt Considering all these facts, the revision petition of the convict is dismissed against the judgment of conviction, however, in view of the discussions made above, the order of sentence is ordered to be modified. Instead of directing the convict to undergo the substantive sentence, he is directed to be released on probation of good conduct, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of ₹30,000/-, with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, to keep peace and be of good behaviour, for a period of two years and to receive the substantive sentence, as and when, called upon to do so, during the period of two years and also to pay compensation of ₹30,000/- to the complainant.
16. It is clarified that in case of violation of any of the conditions, so imposed, including the terms and conditions of ::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2023 20:32:13 :::CIS 6 the requisite bonds, the order of sentence shall revive automatically, without reference to this Court. In that .
eventuality, the convict is directed to surrender before the learned trial Court, to undergo the substantive sentence.
17. In view of the above, the revision petition is partly allowed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also of disposed of accordingly.
December 15, 2023 ( Virender Singh )
Judge
(naveen)
rt
::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2023 20:32:13 :::CIS