Puran vs State of Rajasthan

N.L. Tibrewal, J.—This revision u/s 507 read with section 401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the Judgment dated May 11, 92 of Addl. Sessions Judge, Bayana in Cr. Appeal No. 30/90 confirming the conviction & sentence of the petitioner u/s 447 and 323 IPC passed by the Munsif & Judicial Magistrate Weir in Cr. case No. 269/79.

The only contention made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner ought to have been dealt under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act. The petitioner has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in cash and. u/s 447 & 323 IPC by the trial Magistrate, which has been affirmed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bayana. The reason given by the trial Magistrate for not giving the benefit of probation has been described that the sentence of fine will act to prevent the petitioner to repeat the offence. In my view this could hardly be a reason to decline the benefit of probation to the petitioner, if he is otherwise entitled to get the same.

After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned P.P. and having regard to the circumstance of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender, 1 think it just and proper to release him on probation of good conduct.

It is, therefore, directed that he be released on probation on his entering into a bond in the sum of Rs. 1,000/- to appear and receive sentence when called upon during a period of six months and in the meantine to keep peace and be of good behaviour.

The revision petition is partly allowed as indicated above. The bond shall be furnished before the trial Magistrate within one month from to day.