JUDGMENT :-

Per Smt. Ranjana Prakash Desai, J.

(A) Penal Code, 1860, Sections 120-B/420 and 420-Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2)-Conviction and sentence-Accused 'S' who died was convicted under P.C. Act-His co-accused not convicted for offence under Act of 1988-High Court could not have confirmed non-existent conviction of co-accused persons under the P.C. Act. [Para 6]

(B) Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, Section 4(1)-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 360-Penal Code, 1860, Sections 120-B/420 and 420-Accused persons convicted under Sections 120-B/420 and 420, IPC Remained in custody for 20 days-High Court released the accused persons on probation of good conduct under Section 4(1) of the 1958 Act-Offence committed in 1996-Impugned judgment dated 4.5.2010-Dne accused already completed' his probation period-His surety stands discharged Order releasing the accused on probation of good conduct affirmed Appeals dismissed. [Para 9]

Per Madan B. Lokur, J. (in agreement with Ranjana Prakash Desai, J.)

(C) Criminal Jurisprudence Punishment-Should be rehabilitative and humanizing-Need not be retributive in character-Imperative for a Judge to strike fine balance between releasing a convict after admonition or on probation or putting such a convict in jail-This can be decided only on case to case basis--Court required to award a just sentence to convicts treating them in a manner that tends to assist in their habilitation-If not possible to release a convict on probation-Trial Judge must record reasons-Grant of compensation to the victim of a crime equally a part of just sentencing. [Paras 4, 17, 20 and 21]

Case-laws

(1980) 2 SCC 684; (1981) 1 SCC 447; (1988) 4 SCC 551; (1999) 5 SCC 732; (1997) 7 SCC 756; (2004) 9 SCC 681; (2000) 10 SCC 477; 2000 (2) East Cr C 676 (SC) : (2000) 5 SCC 82; 2009 (4) East Cr C 12 (SC) : (2009) 7 SCC 178; 2008 (1) East Cr C 136 (SC) : (2007) 6 SCC 231; 2012 (1) East Cr C 215 (SC) : (2012) 2 SCC 182; (2012) 2 SCC 648; (2012) 8 SCC 450; (2013) 10 SCC 31; (2013) 6 SCC 770; (2013) 11 SCC 193-Relied on.

JUDGMENT

(Smt.) Ranjan Prakash Desai, J.

Leave granted.

2. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana by judgment and order dated 4.5.2010 disposed of two criminal appeals being Criminal Appeal Nos. 1230-SB and 1231-SB of 1999 since, they arose out of a common judgment. The said judgment and order is impugned in the present appeals.

3. For disposal of these appeals it is not necessary to narrate the facts in great detail. FIR was registered on 31.5.1996 against S.P. Gupta, the then Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Hoshiarpur. R.P. Chopra. Assistant Administrative Officer. National Insurance Company Limited. Hoshiarpur, Sanjiv Bhalla, Surveyor and Major Purshotam Singh (Retd.) on the basis of a source information report. It was, inter alia, alleged in the FIR that S.P. Gupta while posted and functioning as Divisional Manager in National Insurance Company Limited. Hoshiarpur, entered into a criminal conspiracy with R.P. Chopra. Assistant Administrative officer. National Insurance Company Limited, Hoshiarpur, Sanjiv Bhalla. Surveyor and Major Purshotam Singh (Retd.) proprietor of M/s. Kisan Poultary Farm District Kangra and some other unknown persons with the object of cheating the National Insurance Company Limited by abusing his official position as a public servant and. in pursuance of the said conspiracy S.P. Gupta passed a fire claim of Rs.7.02.873/- and also made part payment of Rs. 2.00.000/- to Major Purshotam Singh (Retd.) on the basis of a false claim and that caused pecuniary loss to the National Insurance Company Limited. The FIR further stated how S.P. Gupta. Divisional Manager of National Insurance Company Limited abused his official position and by corrupt and illegal means obtained pecuniary advantage for himself or for his co-accused.

4. The Central Bureau of Investigation (for short the CBI) investigated the complaint and upon completion of the i