Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
S.S.Dewan, J.
Balbir Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Criminal Revision No. 846 of 1983,
Decided On : APRIL 25, 1984
Costs - Probation - The court held that when an accused person is ordered to be released on probation, he cannot be burdened with costs, based on the interpretation of the law and a previous decision.
Fact of the Case:
Balbir Singh was convicted under Sec.9 of the Opium Act and sentenced to imprisonment and a fine. On appeal, he was released on probation but was directed to pay costs of the proceedings. He filed a revision petition challenging the order to pay costs.
Finding of the Court:
The court accepted the revision petition to the extent that while the order directing the petitioner to be released on probation is maintained, the direction issued to him for the payment of costs of the proceedings is set aside. Costs, if paid, shall be refunded to him.
Issues: The only point urged in the revision petition was whether an accused person ordered to be released on probation can be burdened with costs.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the law and a previous decision, which concluded that an accused person ordered to be released on probation cannot be burdened with costs.
Final Decision: The revision petition was accepted to the extent that the direction to pay costs of the proceedings was set aside, and any costs paid shall be refunded to the petitioner.
S. S. Dewan, J.
1. Balbir Singh was brought to trial for the ooence under Sec.9 of the Opium Act and having been held guilty there under, was sentenced to 6 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.300.00 by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Phagwara, on March 8, 1983. On appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, upheld his conviction but instead of sentencing him, released him on probation for 2 years. The petitioner was also directed to pay Rs.300/as costs of the proceedings. Feeling dissatisfied he has now come up in revision.
2. The only point that has been urged in this revision petition is that under the law, when an accused person is ordered to be released on probation, he cannot be burdened with costs. Reliance is placed on a decision in Gurbachan Sinqh V/s. The State of Punjab, in support of this contention. Mr. S. S. Aulakh, Advocate, appearing tor the State has nothing to repel this contention. Consequently, the revision petition is accepted to the extent that while the order directing the petitioner to be released on probation is maintained, the direction issued to him for the payment of Rs.300/i as costs of the proceedings is set aside. Costs, if paid, shall be refunded to him. Petition allowed.
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
