STATE Vs. RAM KHILARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This reference has come up before us by an order of the Additional District Magistrate of Agra passed on 30-9-58. When it was laid before a learned single Judge of this Court he directed notice to issue to Ram Khilari Respondent to show cause why an appropriate sentence should not be passed upon him Ram Khilari is personally served and is represented by Mr. Sabd Saran who holds a pauper brief because Ram Khilari in response to the notice issued to him contended that he is not possessed of sufficient means to defend himself in this Court.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this reference are these. On 23-9-57, at about 1 A.M., certain thieves entered into the Kotha of Basti Ram, the complainant, by breaking open the roof of his house. When Basti Ram woke up, some of the miscreants escaped. Ram Khilari, the Respondent, was caught when he was coming out of the house and was trying to escape with silver ornaments worth Rs. 49/8/- and with a dhoti and a chadar worth Rs. 8/-. The matter was reported to the police and Ram Khilari was also handed over along with the articles aforesaid. The case came up before a learned Magistrate of the first class. The Magistrate chose to proceed with the trial in the manner of trial of a summary case as provided by Section 260 Code of Criminal Procedure. Ram Khilari pleaded guilty to the charge. He wished to be excused. The learned Magistrate found the accused guilty and applied Section 3 of the up First Offenders' Probation Act, No. VI of 1938 and instead of sentencing him to any punishment released him after due admonition.

(3.) In making the reference the learned Additional District Magistrate of Agra has said that Section 3 of the U.P. First Offenders' Probation Act does not apply to the case and the order of the learned trying Magistrate was therefore erroneous. Section 3 of the Act is in the following terms: