Harnek Singh vs State of Punjab

J.S. Sekhon, J. (Oral)

The petitioner was found guilty by the trial Court under section 9 of the Opium Act for being in possession of 10 kgs. of opium and sentenced to undergo one year''s rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/ or in default of payment thereof to further suffer three months'' rigorous imprisonment.

On appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, maintained the order of conviction and sentence.

The benefit of the provisions of Section 6 of the Probation of Offenders Act was not given to the petitioner in view of huge quantity of opium recovered, even though it was specifically stressed by the learned counsel for the appellant that he being less than 21 years of age at the time of commission of offence, the report of Probation Officer should have been called.

Vide order dated November, 1989, this Court called for the report of the Probation Officer, Ludhiana, about the antecedents of the petitioner. Accordingly, the Probation Officer has submitted his report after due enquiry to the effect that the petitioner, is a first offender and there is no back history of his involvement in any criminal case.

The apex Court in Masarullah v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1983(3) RCR(Crl.) 102 (SC) : 1984(1) CLR 298 has laid down the guidance for releasing an offender below 21 years of age on probation and has stressed that it was the duty of the trial Court to call for a report of the Probation Officer and consider the circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and the character of the offender while deciding the granting of benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act. In the case in hand, the petitioner was found in possession of 10 kgs. of opium on March 1, 1982, at Railway Station, Khanna. He had given his age as 22 years during the recording of his statement on February 27, 1985 under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thus, the petitioner, was about 19 years old at the time of commission of offence and obviously, below 20 years. In view of the young age of the petitioner and his good antecedents besides keeping in view the reformative trend of modem penology, it is a fit case where the petitioner should be afforded at least one opportunity to reform himself. He is, therefore, directed to be released on probation for a period of two years on furnishing requisite bonds in triplicate to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, within one month from today, undertaking to keep peace, be of good behaviour and to surrender before the requisite authorities for undergoing the remaining portion of sentence if required to do so. The conduct of the petitioner is further directed to be placed under the supervision of the Probation Officer, Ludhiana.

The revision petition stands allowed to the extend indicated upon.