THE STATE Vs. KRUSHNA CHANDRA SAMAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE eight opposite parties were convicted under Section 143/504, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for a period of fifteen days each under each count; the sentences to run concurrently. The learned Magistrate released all of them under Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Act '), on their executing a bond with one surety for Rs. 1,000/ - each. The illegality committed by the learned Magistrate was that if he wanted to release the accused persons on probation he should have merely convicted but should not have sentenced them.

(2.) ON issue of notice though the accused persons excepting accused Nos. 3 and 5 appeared, the legality of the conviction has not been challenged before me.

(3.) THREE witnesses were examined by the prosecution. Eight witnesses were examined on behalf of the defence all speaking of alibi of each of the accused persons. The defence version was not accepted by the learned Magistrate and he accepted the prosecution story on charges under Sections 143 and 504, Indian Penal Code. He acquitted them of the charge under Section 342. Indian Penal Code. After having gone through the evidence on record I am satisfied that the learned Magistrate recorded the correct finding.