STATE OF U P Vs. D N SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference by the Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad, in Sessions Trial No. 239 of 1980, which has been disposed of by Sri D.N. Shukla, I Additional Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad, and after convicting Banwari and Barjor Singh in this case under Ss. 307 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code, he has given them benefit under Sec. 4 of the U. P. First Offenders Probation Act and has ordered that they may be released on furnishing bonds.

(2.) The learned Sessions Judge of Farrukhabad on coming to know of this decision felt that it was wholly illegal because in a case under Sec. 307 of the Indian Penal Code, when the accused were found guilty, they could not be given benefit under Sec. 4 of the U. P. First Offenders Probation Act, he, therefore, made this reference to this Court to take up this matter in the revisional court jurisdiction of this Court, and to remove the injustice caused. This matter was, therefore, taken on the judicial side and has been listed as a revision.

(3.) In this case injuries were caused to two persons, Vinod Kumar and Moharram Khan. In respect of the injuries caused to Moharram Khan offence under Sec. 324 of the Indian Penal Code was found to be proved and in respect of the injuries caused to Vinod Kumar with a gun, the offence under Sec. 307 of the Indian Penal Code was proved. The learned Additional Sessions Judge heard the counsel for the parties on the sentence, which should be awarded and after hearing them, he gave the convict accused Banwari and Barjor Singh benefit under Sec. 4 of the U. P. First Offenders Probation Act. This, according to the learned Sessions Judge, was illegal and benefit under Sec. 4 of the U. P. First Offenders Probation Act could not be given to these accused because they were convicted under Sec. 307 of the Indian Penal Code also and because in this case injuries were caused to Vinod Kumar, which constitutes an offence under Sec. 307 of the Indian Penal Code.