RAMNARESH PANDEY Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave by Ramnaresh Pandey against the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court.

(2.) The appellant was prosecuted under Section 506 Indian Penal Code on the allegation that be had on May 11, 1970 committed an offence of criminal intimidation by intimidating Lady Dr. Majumdar. The trail magistrate convicted the appellant under Part II of Section 506 Indian Penal Code and directed that he be released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 on the execution of a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 700 and with one surety in the like amount for a period of one year. On appeal the Additional Sessions Judge Jagdalpur altered the conviction of the appellant to that under Part I of Section 506 Indian Penal Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge set aside the order of the trial Court releasing the appellant on probation of good conduct and awarded a sentence of payment of fine of Rs. 50. In default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of seven days Revision filed by the appellant against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge was dismissed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The appellant thereafter came up in appeal to this Court by special leave.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has contended before us, as was submitted on behalf of the appellant in the High Court, that the Additional Sessions Judge should not have set aside the order directing the release of the appellant on probation of good conduct and imposed instead of that a sentence of fine and of imprisonment in default. In support of the above contention, it is urged in the first instance that by imposing the sentence of payment of fine and of imprisonment in default of payment of fine, instead of the order under S. 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, the Additional Sessions Judge enhanced the sentence imposed upon, the appellants. Such enhancement of the sentence by the Additional Sessions Judge, according to the learned counsel, is not legally permissible. To show that sentence of fine and of imprisonment in default constitutes enhancement and is a more severe sentence compared to the order for release on probation of good conduct, our attention has been invited to Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, according to which