The court granted the benefit of probation under the Probation of Offenders Act to first-time offenders in a land dispute case, emphasizing the absence of serious injuries and long-standing peace post-incident.

JUDGMENT :

PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard Mr. Shree Nivas Roy, learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as Mrs. Vandana Bharti, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State.

2. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.06.2006 and 17.06.2006 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih in Sessions Trial Case No.194 of 2000 whereby and whereunder all the appellants were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (R.I.) for one years for the offence punishable under Section 147 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , R.I. for one and a half years for the offence punishable under Section 148 of the I.P.C., S.I. for two months for the offence punishable under Section 447 of the I.P.C., (S.I.) for one month for the offence punishable under Section 34 1 of the I.P.C., appellants No.1 and 2 were sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years for the offence punishable under Section 307 /34 of the I.P.C. and appellants No.2 and 3 were sentenced to undergo S.I. for six months for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the I.P.C.

3. The prosecution case is based on written information by Damodar Modi (informant) stating inter alia that on 27.07.1998, while ploughing his land with his brother and nephew, a dispute arose with the accused persons over land ownership and they were assaulted by the accused persons, including Rama Rai and others, who were armed with weapons. The attack with the intention to kill allegedly led by Sakaldeo Rai, resulted in injuries to the informant and his family and witnesses were present during the incident. On the basis of written information of the informant, Dhanwar P.S. Case No.158 of 1998 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147 , 148, 326, 323, 341, 324, 307, 447 and 379 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE .

4. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellants for the aforesaid offences including Section 149 of the I.P.C. and accordingly, cognizance was taken and subsequently, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, thereafter, the case was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-I for trial and disposal which was registered as Sessions Case No.194 of 2000. Charges were framed against the accused persons which were read over and explained to them for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. After conclusion of trial, the appellants were held guilty for the aforesaid offences and sentenced as stated above which has been assailed in this appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants without touching the merits of the judgment has confined himself to the point of non-extending the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as ‘The Act of 1958’) to the appellants to which they deserve. It is further submitted that the appellants have been implicated in this case due to land dispute between the parties. Admittedly, the informant parties were ploughing the land of appellants which was protested and in a sudden manner, there was exchange of assault from both sides and there was a counter case bearing Dhanwar P.S. Case No.159 of 1998 registered for the offences under Sections 323 , 324, 341, 307 of the I.P.C. It is further submitted that initially F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons out of them Biren Rai and Jisu Rai were juvenile on the date of occurrence and their trial was separated and present appellants were tried in this case and have been found guilty for the offences under Sections 147 , 148, 323, 341, 447, 323, 307/34 of the I.P.C. It is further submitted that no offence