High Courts

Gurdev Singh vs State of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 16 November 1988 · Citation: (1989) 1 AICLR 307 : (1989) 1 RCR(Criminal) 266

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.D.Bajaj, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 1111 of 1988
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 361 words

S.D. Bajaj, J.

1.

For his conviction under section 9 of the Opium Act accused petitioner Gurdev Singh was sentenced by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dabwali, on April 29. 1988, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay Rs. 100/ as fine. In default of payment of fine, accused petitioner was ordered to undergo R.I. for a further period of three months. Crl. Appeal No. 200 CRA of 1988 filed before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, was dismissed on October 17, 1988. Hence this criminal revision in this Court.

2.

I have heard Shri Balwant Singh Randhawa, Advocate, for the petitioner and Sh. Kulbir Singh, Advocate, for the respondentState and have carefully gone through the judgments of the learned two Courts'' below.

3.

The petitioner has not challenged his conviction. The only prayer made before me, with respect to the observations made in Raj Kishan v. The State of Haryana 1987(1) Recent Criminal Reports 193. Ramesh Kumar alias Kala v. The State of Punjab, 1987(1) Recent Criminal Reports 656 and Surinder Kumar v. State of Haryana, 1988(1) Recent Criminal Reports 255 is that the accused petitioner who is first offender may be given a chance to reclaim himself and become a useful member of society by giving him the benefit of the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act ; which was allowed to all the three accusedpetitioners in aforesaid three cases.

4.

I am of the view that it is a fit case where the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act should be pressed into service. Consequently, I suspend the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner and order that the petitioner be released on probation on his furnishing within two months to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court a bond in the sum of five thousand rupees with two sureties each in the like amount to keep the peace and be of good behaviour for a period of one year and to appear to receive the sentence when called upon to do so in the meantime. But for this modification this revision petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

Revision dismissed