K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

Petitioner was working as Head Constable in the Cochin City Traffic Asst. Commissioner's Office.

2. Petitioner was an accused in C.C. No. 162 of 1993 before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kochi, for offences punishable under Ss.419,420 and 34 IPC. While disposing of the calendar case the Criminal Court ordered as follows

"30. In the light of the above discussion, I find that the prosecution has clearly proved the offences punishable under Ss.419,420&34IPC. Accordingly points 1 to 3 are found in favour of the prosecution.

31. Heard the accused on the question of sentence.

32. Considering the nature of the offences I am of the view that this is not a fit case to invoke the benevolent provisions of Probation of Offenders Act. On the other hand, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the accused deserve deterrent punishment. The first accused is police constable. It is persons like A1, who brings a bad name to the entire police force. It is the experience of the public that the police force is infiltrated with criminal elements like A1 who cheat, loot and harass the public as in the present case. In the circumstances, each of th