ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Jadab Barman – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Arun Dev Choudhury, J.
1. Heard Mr. B. M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. None appears for the respondent No. 2.
2. The present Crl. Rev. Petition is filed under Section 401 read with Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 assailing the Judgment and Order dated 17.01.2009 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalbari, in C.R. Case No. 425c/07, whereby the present petitioners were convicted under Sections 447/325/34 of IPC and were sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 500/-each for offence under Section 447 of IPC and in default Simple Imprisonment for 10 days. They were further sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 (two) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-and in default Rigorous Imprisonment of 15 days each under Section 325/34 of IPC.
3. Aforesaid judgment and sentence was challenged by the petitioners before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nalbari in Criminal Appeal No. 06/2009. The said appeal also met with the same fate, however, the learned Sessions Judge, Nalbari modified the judgment and order impugned whereby the accused
The court emphasized the importance of considering probation for first-time offenders, prioritizing rehabilitation over punishment.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 during sentencing, highlighting the need for discretion based on the nature of the offence and the offender's b....
The court emphasized the importance of considering the rehabilitative purpose of sentencing under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, especially for first-time offenders.
The court emphasized the necessity of considering the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 in sentencing, highlighting that sentencing should focus on reform rather than punishment.
The court ruled that proper consideration under the Probation of Offenders Act is essential, especially for first-time offenders in non-heinous cases.
The court emphasized the importance of discretion in sentencing, allowing probation for first-time offenders in non-heinous cases.
The court emphasized that sentencing should consider individual circumstances and not be mechanical, allowing probation for first-time offenders.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the offender's background and the nature of the offence when exercising discretion in sentencing under the Probation of Offenders Act.
The court emphasized the rehabilitative purpose of the Probation of Offenders Act, asserting that first-time offenders should be considered for probation to promote reform rather than punishment.
The court emphasized the necessity of considering the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 in sentencing, especially for first-time offenders, to promote rehabilitation over punishment.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.