ALLAUTIDIN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) B. K. Sharma, J. This is a revision against the judgment and order dated 30-4-1993 passed by Sri D. C, Srivastava, the then Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar in Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 1992 whereby, he dismissed the appeal of the revisionist against the judgment and order dated 21-8-1992 passed by Sri D. P. Goel, Aditional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kairana District Muzaffarnagar in Crl. Case No. 889 of 1991 convicting the revisionist of the offence under Section 324, IPC and sentencing him to R. I. for a period of 1 year. There was no legal infirmity in the judgments and orders of the courts below and this revision was admitted only on the question of sentence. The prayer of the learned Counsel for the accused-revisionist is that the benefit of the U. P. Probation of First Offenders Act, 1938 be given to the accused-revisionist. The occurrence relates to the year 1982 and the accused-revisionist has been on bail during the trial, during the pendency of the appeal and also admittd to bail in the present re vision when it was admitted on the ques tion of sentence. The prosecution has not alleged that any further incident took place between the parties after the date of the occurrence. The prosecution also does not claim that there was any previous convic tion to the discredit of the accused-revisionist. There is also no allegation of the prosecution that the accused-revisionist had any antecedents which disqualified him from getting the benefit of probation.

(2.) CONSIDERING all the circumstances, the revision is dismissed and the convic tion of the accused- revisionist for the of fence made by the trial court and con firmed by the appellate court is upheld. However, the sentence part of the judg ment is set aside and it is directed that the revisionist be released on probation on his entering into a bond for a sum of Rs. 5,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge concerned, within two months from today to apear and receive sentence when called upon to do so during the period of one year from the date of furnishing of the bonds and in the meantime, to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. If the bonds are not famished within the time allowed to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge concerned as directed, the revision shall stand dismissed even with regard to the sentence part of the judgments of both the courts below and he shall have to suf fer R. I. for 1 one year as directed by the trial court and as confirmed by the appel late court for which he shall be got ar rested and consigned to the District Jail concerned to serve out the sentence in accordane with law. If the bonds are fur nished, the Sessions Judge will have the jurisdiction to award sentence to the ac cused-revisionist within the period of one year from the date of furnishing of the bond as provided in Section 4 of the U. P. Probation of First Offencers Act, 1938.