SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(All) 389

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
S.N.Saxena
OM PRAKASH
Versus
STATE OF U P
Decided On : 28 July 1992
Criminal Revision No. 1073 of 1992

The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion to allow a convicted individual to be released on probation of good conduct under the U.P. First Offenders Probation Act, 1958, based on the nature of the offense and the intention of law for reformation of the criminals.

Headnote:

Probation - Criminal Law - The court allowed the revisionist to be released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the U.P. First Offenders Probation Act, 1958, considering the nature of the offense and the intention of law for reformation of the criminals.

Fact of the Case:

The revisionists, who were real brothers, were facing trial and appeal for an incident that took place more than ten years ago. One of the revisionists was denied the benefit of release on probation of good conduct due to inflicting injury on the complainant.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that keeping the revisionist inside the prison after more than ten years would not serve any useful purpose, and the purpose of reformation cannot be achieved by sending him to jail. Considering the circumstances and the intention of law for reformation of the criminals, the court allowed the revisionist to be released on probation of good conduct.

Issues: The main issue was whether the revisionist should be released on probation of good conduct, considering the nature of the offense and the intention of law for reformation of the criminals.

Ratio Decidendi: The court decided to allow the revisionist to be released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the U.P. First Offenders Probation Act, 1958, based on the nature of the offense, the intention of law for reformation of the criminals, and the circumstances of the case.

Final Decision: The revision was partly allowed, maintaining the conviction of the revisionists and confirming the order of release on probation for two of the revisionists, while also granting the same benefit to the third revisionist.

S. N. SAXENA, J.

Admit.

2. Notice has been taken by the learned A. G. A, for the State.

3. I am of the opinion that this revision application can be disposed of finally.

4. Learned Counsel for the revisionists has stated that he did not press their convic tion under Section 324 read with Section 34 I. P. C. Revisionists Nos. 2 and 3, namely, Shanker and Vishwanath Prasad were released on probation of good conduct by the appellate Court but the benefit was denied to revisionist No. 1 Om Prakash mainly on the ground that the injury upon the person of complainant Barmeshwar was inflicted by him. The three revisionists are real brothers. The incident which gave raise to these proceedings had taken place on 4. 4. 82, i. e. more than ten years ago. Since then all there revisionists have been facing the ordeal of trial, appeal and ultimately revision.

5. The trial Court had awarded the sentence of six months R. I. and fine of Rs. 500/- to revisionist Om Prakash under Section 324 I. P. C. The appellate Court, however, had reduced the sentence of imprisonment to three months only.

6. In my opinion, no useful purpose will be served now after more than ten years by keeping the revisionist Om Prakash inside the prison in the company of hardened criminals. The purpose of his reformation cannot be achieved by sending him to jail.

7. Revisionist Om Prakash has been convicted under Section 324 I. P. C. only which does not involve any moral turpitude. It is also not a heinous crime. The nature of the prosecution story suggests that the occurrence had taken place due to sudden rise of temper.

8. Considering all these circumstances and the intention of law for reformation of the criminals, I find it proper to give revisionist Om Prakash also the benefit of Section 4 of the U. P. First Offenders Probation Act, 1958, as given to revisionists Shanker and Vishwanath.

9. The revision, in view of the above discussion, is partly allowed. The conviction of the revisionists is maintained. The order of the Court of appeal for release of Shanker and Vishwanath Prasad on probation is confirmed. Revisionist Om Prakash also is given the benefit of release on probation of good conduct on the same terms and conditions upon which it was given to revisionists Shanker and Vishwanath Prasad. He shall be released from the jail at present. He, thereafter, shall execute the personal bond and furnish the sureties within 15 days in the trial Court. In case of violation of the terms and conditions, he shall be called upon and directed to undergo the sentence awarded to him by the appellate Court. Revision partly allowed


.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top