Constable Rakshpal Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

While convicting the revisionist – accused Constable Rakshpal Singh under Section 223 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”) by learned Trial Court, he was punished with a fine of Rs.2,000/-.

Heard Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pramod Tiwari, learned Brief Holder for the State.

Admit.

As per the prosecution, on 25.07.2003, the revisionist along with other police Constables produced the accused Vishwas Pandit before the Special Judge (Gangster Act). When they were taking him back after producing him before the Court, he ran away from their custody from the Railway Station. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed.

Charges were framed under Section 223 IPC and Section 224 IPC. Revisionist – accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined as many as three witnesses.

The statement of the revisionist – accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He denied all the incriminating evidence, produced by the prosecution.

Learned Trial Court heard the parties, appreciated the evidence and passed the judgment.

Revisionist was acquitted of the charge framed under Section  224 IPC, however, he was convicted under Section 223 IPC.

Revisionist filed an Appeal against the said judgment dated 02.08.2018, passed by learned Trial Court in Criminal Case No.8747 of 2018. The said Criminal Appeal (No.155 of 2018) has been dismissed vide judgment dated 03.12.2022, passed by learned Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge, Haridwar.

Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, Advocate, submits that the present matter is pending since 2003. Revisionist has no criminal history and two co-accused persons were granted benefit of probation by the Sessions Judge, Haridwar.

After advancing the said submissions, Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, Advocate, has requested to alter the sentence and give him (revisionist) the benefit of probation under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

The said submissions have not been opposed by the State.

Learned counsel for the State submits that as per the report, received from the Probation Officer, Tehri Garhwal, revisionist has no criminal history.

The present matter is pending since 2003. Two co-accused persons were granted benefit of probation by learned Sessions Judge, Haridwar. There is nothing on record to indicate that the revisionist had earlier been involved any unacceptable activities.

After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it seems appropriate that the sentence, passed against the revisionist, should be altered and the benefit of probation should be granted to the revisionist.

Consequently, without altering the findings of the court below, the nature of the sentence is being altered.

Resultantly, the revisionist – accused Rakshpal Singh be released on probation on good conduct for six months, on his entering into a bond of Rs.30,000/- with one surety of the like amount to appear and receive sentence when he is called during such period. In the meantime, he is directed to keep the peace and be of good behavior. Revisionist is further directed to appear before the Probation Officer, Tehri Garhwal, within a week from today.

Registry is directed to send a certified copy of this judgment to the Probation Officer, Tehri Garhwal, for necessary action. The provision of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 will apply in the present matter.

Present Criminal Revision (No.793 of 2022) stands disposed of accordingly.