The court established that probation can be granted under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, even for older offenders, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment.

JUDGMENT :

Ganesh Ram Meena, J.

1. This criminal appeal has been filed by two convicted persons namely; Lal Chand and Ghanshyam both sons of Shri Devi Lal, residents of Village Gordhanpura, Police Station Ramganj Mandi, District Kota (Rajasthan).

2. As per the report dated 14.01.2024 submitted by learned Public Prosecutor, accused appellant No.1- Lal Chand s/o Shri Devi Lal has expired.

3. The Coordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 16.01.2024 after taking into consideration the aforesaid report directed to mark with red ink in front of appellant No.1 in the cause title about his demise and further directed in regard to survives of appeal qua the appellant No.2 Ghanshyam only.

4. Thus, the criminal appeal as regards the accused appellant No.1- Lal Chand stands abated and the appeal qua the accused appellant No.2- Ghanshyam, which now survives, is being decided by this Judgment.

5. The present criminal appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellant against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 16.12.1993 passed by the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.3, Kota Camp Court, Ramganjmandi, District Kota (Rajasthan) in Sessions Case No.204/1992, whereby, he has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

6. On filing of appeal, the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant was suspended vide order dated 22.12.1993 and he was released on bail.

7. Mr. S.K. Jain, Counsel appearing for the accused-appellant instead of arguing the appeal on its merits with regard to challenge to the conviction and sentence, confines his arguments for grant of benefit of probation to the appellant under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1958’). Counsel further submits that except the present case, no case has been registered against the accused-appellant. Counsel further submits that the accused-appellant is living peacefully in the society without there being any criminal antecedents to his discredit.

8. Learned counsel further submits that the accused-appellant has faced trial for about six years and against the impugned judgment, he preferred the appeal in the year, 1993. Thus, from the last 31 years, the accused-appellant is facing mental agony and harassment because of pendency of criminal case registered against him. Counsel further submits that the accused appellant is above 40 years of age and is a senior citizen. Thus, taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, the accused-appellant may be given the benefit of probation under the provisions of the Act of 1958.

9. Counsel for the appellant has also relied upon the judgment of this Court passed in case of Nawal Kishore & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Appeal No.483/1993), decided on 19.02.2024.

10. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State opposed the prayer made by the counsel appearing for the accused-appellant and submits that looking to the allegations and the manner in which the incident took place, the appellant is not entitled for any kind of leniency in awarding sentence as well as the benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Act of 1958.

11. Considered the submissions made by the counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

12. Learned trial Court while considering the issue of granting leniency to the accused appellant, has rejected his prayer in regard to the leniency.

13. The submissions which persuaded this Court to grant benefit of probation to the ac