Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 4063
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J
RAJINDER SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB – Respondent
CRA-S-2497-SB-2004
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Arshvinder Singh
For the Respondents: Mr. Jatinderpal Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab
The court emphasized rehabilitative justice allowing probation for first-time offenders, considering age and prolonged trials.
Headnote:(A) IPC - Sections 460, 307, 325, 324, 323 - Appeal against conviction and sentence - The conviction of the appellants was affirmed, with the appellant No.1’s appeal abated due to death. The court assessed the appellant No.2’s request for probation in light of prolonged trial and absence of prior offenses. Considerations for probation included the aging, health status, and circumstances surrounding the offense. (Paras 1-12)
(B) Probation of Offenders Act - The Act emphasizes rehabilitation over incarceration, recognizing the socio-economic roots of crime. The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that first-time offenders deserve consideration for probation under certain conditions. (Paras 6, 8, 10)
Facts of the case:
The appeal challenged convictions resulting from a lengthy trial for serious offenses, with considerations for the appellant's health and absence of misconduct.
Findings of Court:
The Court granted probation to the guilty appellant due to mitigating circumstances and long trial duration.
Issues: The main issues included whether probation could be granted considering the offender's age, health, and absence of prior criminal records.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled in favor of probation, adhering to rehabilitative principles, emphasizing that continued incarceration was unnecessary given the circumstances.
Result: Appeal dismissed on merits; sentence modified to grant probation.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the appeal involves a challenge to past convictions and sentencing. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. highlights the objectives of probation laws and their application to non-hardened criminals. (Para 4 , 7 , 8 , 11) |
| 3. the appeal's focus is on the consideration for probation. (Para 5 , 6 , 9) |
| 4. decision to grant probation based on circumstances affecting the offender. (Para 12) |
| 5. final determination that the conviction stands but with modified sentencing. (Para 13 , 14) |
RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The instant appeal has been filed challenging the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence, both dated 08.12.2004, passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Rupnagar (hereinafter referred to as 'learned trial Court') in case No.RT-97/27.08.1999/16.04.2004, titled as State v. Baldev Singh and others, arising out of FIR No. 21 dated 29.04.1999, registered under Sections 460, 307, 325, 324, 323 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Chamkaur Sahib, District Ropar, whereby the appellants were held guilty for commission of offence under Section 460/325/324/323 of IPC and were sentenced to undergo maximum rigorous imprisonment for 03 years with default clause.
2. At this juncture, learned counsel for the appellants submit that appellant No.1- Rajinder Singh has died during pendency of the instant appeal and as such the petition qua him is abated. As far as challenge to the conviction of appellant No.2 is concerned, he submits that he is not challenging the sentence and confines his prayer that the appeal be considered for extending the benefit of probation to the appellant No.2 considering prolonged trial and no criminal antecendents post conviction in present FIR.
3. Learned State counsel has also acknowledged the factum of death of the appellant No.1 and takes this Court to Annexure R-1 (death certificate of appellant No.1).
4. In the circumstances, the appeal qua appellant No.1 stands abated.
5. Since the learned counsel is not challenging the impugned judgment passed by the Court below on their merit and seeking benefit of probation, the sole consideration before this Court is as to whether the prayer made by the appellant No.2 for extending benefit of probation can be accepted or not?
6. Before proceeding to consider the prayer made by the appellant No.2 for release of the accused on probation, it is apposite to refer to the legal position on the subject. The aims and objectives of the Probation of Offenders Act were authoritatively laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jugal Kishore Prasad v. State of Bihar , AIR 1972 SC 2522. Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the scope of the Probation Act had held as under:-
"The Probation of Offenders Act was enacted in 1958 with a view to provide for the release of offenders of certain categories on probation or after due admonition and for matters connected therewith. The object of the Act is to prevent the conversion of youthful offenders into obdurate criminals as a result of their association with hardened criminals of mature age in case the youthful offenders are sentenced to undergo imprisonment in jail. The above object is in consequence with the present trend in the field of penology, according to which effort should be made to bring about correction and reformation of the individual offenders and not to resort to retributive justice. Modem criminal jurisprudence recognizes that no one is a born criminal and that a good many crimes are the product of socio-economic milieu. Although not much can be done for hardened criminals, considerable stress has been laid on bringing about reform of young offenders not guilty of very serious offences and of preventing their association with hardened criminals."
7. Reliance can also be placed upon Isher Das v. State of Punjab , AIR 1972 Supreme Court 1295 and Arvind Mohan Sinha v. Amulya Kumar Biswas and others, 1974 AIR (SC) 1818, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken the
