Back
2000 Supreme(All) 900
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Ikram-Ul-Bari
BENI
Versus
STATE OF U P
Decided On : 12 July 2000
Criminal Misc. Application No. 20273 of 2000
S.K.TRIPATHI,
The main legal point established in the judgment is the Court's power to recall its previous order and direct the trial Court to reconsider a request for release on probation, especially when the basis for denial was found to be incorrect.
Headnote:
Section 482 Cr. P. C. - Release on Probation - Court recalls its previous order and directs trial court to reconsider the request for release on probation with cogent reasons.
Fact of the Case:
The petition was filed by two revisionists seeking release on probation. The request for release on probation was initially turned down by the trial Court and the appellate Court, citing that no such request was made before them.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the trial Court had indeed rejected the request for release on probation, but the basis of denial was incorrect as the request had been made before the trial Court. The Court recalled its previous order and directed the trial Court to reconsider the request for release on probation within one month, providing cogent reasons for its decision.
Issues: The main issue was the denial of the request for release on probation by the trial Court and the appellate Court based on the incorrect assertion that no such request was made before them.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was influenced by the fact that the trial Court had indeed received the request for release on probation, and the basis for denial was found to be incorrect. The Court exercised its power under Section 482 Cr. P. C. to recall its previous order and direct the trial Court to reconsider the request with proper reasoning.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the orders of the trial Court and the appellate Court were set aside. The trial Court was directed to reconsider the request for release on probation within one month, providing cogent reasons for its decision.
This petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed by Beni and Manni who were two of the revisionists in Crl. Revision No. 560 of 1985. The revision was decided on merits on 29-7-1997 after hearing the counsel for the applicants.
2. At the time of the hearing of the revision the learned counsel for the ap plicants had pleaded for release of the applicants on probation. The request was turned down on the ground that no such request was ever made before the trial Court or the appellate Court.
3. Now it is pointed out that such request had been made before the trial Court. It is argued that the trial Court had rejected the request without giving ade quate reasons and rejection of request was arbitrary on the part of the trial Court. It is also contended that similar request was made before the appellate Court but the appellate Court has not referred to this request in the judgment.
4. It has been noticed that in the trial Court judgment there is a reference to the request for release of four accused on probation. The trial Court has rejected the request with the statement. "vidhwan Adhiwakta ko sunne ke paschal mai is mat ka hoon ki jis vad me uprokt parishthitiyan ko us me first offender ka labh dena nyayuchit nahi samjhta hoon. "
5. It is to be accepted that the request of the learned counsel for the applicants at the time of the hearing of the revision was not properly appreciated and the factum of such request before the trial Court was not noticed. The basis of the denial of the benefit of the provisions of the First Of fender Act was that no such request was made before either of the Courts below. The basis was not correct.
6. This Courts order dated 29-7-1997 is, therefore, recalled. The orders of the trial Court and the appellate Court against which the revision has been filed are set aside. The trial Court is directed to recon sider the request for release on probation of the applicants and decide it in accord ance with law within one month from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order after giving cogent reasons.
Petition allowed.
.
