STATE Vs. PARAMASIVAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent herein who is the accused in C. C. No. 116 of 1983 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kulithalai was charged for an offence under Sec. 3 (a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession)Act, 1966 as he was found in possession of 13 steel keys belonging to the railways, out of which four numbers were having the Railway markings. THE accused has not offered any explanation with regard to his unlawful possession of the Railway property before the Magistrate. Learned Magistrate found him guilty and convicted him. Further, learned Magistrate instead of sentencing him to imprisonment, released him under Sec. 4 (1) of the probation of Offenders Act, on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs. 500 with one surety for the like sum to the effect that he will appear and receive the sentence, whenever called upon during a period of six months from that date and in the mean time to keep the peace and be of good behaviour.

(2.) IN the appeal by State it is represented that a minimum imprisonment of one year is prescribed under Sec. 3 (a)of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, in the absence of special and adequate reasons and as such the Probation of Offenders Act is not applicable. Learned Public Prosecutor also cited a decision of this Court reported in Sekar v. State by Assistant Sub inspector, Railway Protection Force, 1983 L. W. ( Crl.)44, wherein Maheswaran , J. observed that the provision under Sec. 3 of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, prescribing a minimum punishment is manifestly inconsistent with the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act. Therefore, the application of the Probation of offenders Act is excluded. Learned Public Prosecutor further contended that the trial Court ought to have awarded a substantive term of imprisonment.

(3.) IN the result, this appeal is dismissed.