Back
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Rajesh Kuamar Jain – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, J.:— This criminal appeal has been filed by the accused-appellant (for brevity “the appellant”) against the judgment dated 29.04.1989 passed by the learned Special Court (Essential Commodities Act), Jaipur (for brevity “the learned trial Court”) in Criminal Case No. 5/1987 (summary trial): State of Rajasthan v. Rajesh Kumar. whereby, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:—
4. months’ rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default whereof: 3 months’ simple imprisonment.
2. The relevant facts in brief are that on an inspection dated 24.05.1985 by the Enforcement Inspector of the fair price shop of the appellant under order of the District Supply Officer, Jaipur, various irregularities were found whereupon, an FIR dated 06.07.1985 (Ex-P-18) was registered against him with the Police Station Bandikui under Section 3 /7 of the Act of 1955. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against him. The trial Court narrated substance of accusation under Section 3 /7 of the Act of 1955 to the appellant who pleaded not guilty. After summary trial, t
(1) Court may, for adequate and special reasons, impose punishment less than minimum prescribed in the Section.(2) Even if minimum sentence is provided in Essential Commodities Act, 1955 same will no....
The court held that an offender under the Essential Commodities Act can be granted probation despite a statutory minimum sentence, especially considering age and lack of prior offenses.
The court emphasized that possession exceeding permissible limits transforms a person into a dealer necessitating a license under the Essential Commodities Act, while also considering rehabilitation ....
Judicial discretion allows the court to grant probation under the Probation of Offenders Act despite statutory minimum sentences, considering individual circumstances and rehabilitative needs.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 307 IPC but granted probation, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment for offenders above 21 years.
The court emphasized the importance of rehabilitation over punishment under the Probation of Offenders Act, reflecting a reformative approach.
The court emphasized the rehabilitative purpose of the Probation of Offenders Act, allowing probation for an offender with no prior convictions and considering age and societal behavior.
The court can extend probation benefits to offenders above 21 years under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
