ORDER

This Criminal Revision Petition under Section 397 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C') has been filed by the accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Court of Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Hosadurga (for short the 'Trial Court) in C.C.No.308/2014 dated 07.06.2018 and the judgment and order passed by the I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Chitradurga (for short the 'Appellate Court') in Crl.A.No.33/2018 dated 11.12.2018.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Facts leading to filing of this revision petition narrated briefly are, on 23.05.2011 at about 2.45 p.m., accused no.1 who is the brother of accused no.2 was found writing the examination paper of accuse no.2 in Room No.2A of Government First Grade college by impersonating himself as his brother, namely accused no.2. The invigilator of the examination hall PW.2, having noticed the same verified the hall ticket of accused no.1 and found that it belongs to accuse no.2. Immediately accuse no.1 ran away from the examination hall. Thereafter, the answer paper which accused no.1 was writing and the hall ticket of accuse no.2 were produced by PW2 before PW.1, who in turn lodged a complaint against accused persons before the jurisdiction police which had resulted in registration of FIR in crime no.146/2011 against the petitioners herein for the offence punishable under section 419 read with 34 of IPC.

4. The police after investigation had filed charge sheet against the petitioners for the aforesaid offences. The petitioners herein / accused nos.1 and 2 had appeared before the trial court after receipt of summons and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in order to prove its case had examined 9 witnesses as PW1 to PW9 and got marked 14 documents as Ex.P1 to P14 and the material objects were marked as M.O.1. to M.O.3 through the prosecution witnesses. The accused persons who had denied the incriminating circumstances available against them on record during the course of their section 313 of Cr.P.C, statement, however, did not choose to lead any defence evidence. Accused no.2 had produced certain documents which were marked as Ex.D1 and D2. After hearing the arguments addressed on both sides the trial court by its judgement and order dated 07.06.2018 had convicted the petitioners for the offence punishable under section 419 read with 34 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years and pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each for the said offence and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. The said judgement and order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court was confirmed by the appellate court in Crl.A.No.33/2018 dated 11.12.2018. It is under this factual background, the petitioners are before this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are youngsters who were college students when the alleged crime was committed by them. He submits that the petitioners do not intend to seriously challenge the judgement and order of conviction passed against them. He submits that taking into consideration the nature of offence, age of the petitioners and also their background, leniency may be shown and sentence imposed by the Courts below may be reduced. Alternatively, he also submits that the petitioners are the first offenders and therefore this Court may also consider extending the benefit of probation to the petitioners in exercise of its power under section 360 of Cr.P.C,. He submit that the petitioners are direct brothers and they are the only children to their parents who are now aged and dependent upon the petitioners.

6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the charge against the petitioners has been proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt by producing oral and documentary evidence before the Courts below. She submits that the petitioners were involved in two other cases, therefore, they ar