DARSHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DARSHAN Singh, the appellant herein, was convicted by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar vide judgment dated 16.4.1990 under Sections 325/324/323/34 IPC for having caused injuries to Bhupinder Kaur. The maximum sentence awarded to the appellant was two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-. An appeal was then preferred and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar, vide impugned judgment dated 15.7.1991 released the appellant under Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on his entering into a probation bond for a period of two years with one surety in the like amount. He was also ordered to pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation to injured Bhupinder Kaur. The fine already paid has been converted into litigation/cost of the proceedings. It was then directed by the lower Appellate Court that the appeal shall be dismissed in toto in case the compensation was not deposited within one week. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.

(2.) I have heard Mr. A.S. Jattana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant as proxy counsel for Mr. S.K. Singla and Ms. B.K. Mann, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General for the respondent-State. With their assistance I have also gone through the records.

(3.) THE only argument advanced by Mr. Jattana is that while releasing the accused on probation, no condition can be imposed in default of payment of fine, as it amounts to punishing him with some sentence which directly defeats the purpose of releasing on probation and renders the provisions of the Act redundant. According to Mr. Jattana the observation made by the learned lower Appellate Court in this regard is thus unsustainable.