SHADI RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The -petitioners were convicted under section 323 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to three months' rigorous 'imprisonment each and a fine of, Rs. 400/ - each. In default, to further undergo rigorous Their appeal having imprisonment for one month each. having been dismissed by the learned Sessions judge, Gurgaon, they have prefer this revision petition. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, notice as regards sentence only was issued by S. S. Dewan, J.

(2.) AT the outset learned counsel for the State pointed out that by getting benefit of the remission granted to the petitioners, none of them has to serve sentence of imprisonment for a day even. As such, the question of reduction in the sentence of imprisonment does not at all arise.

(3.) IN the alternative, learned counsel for the petitioners contended they be released an probation. In support of his argument, he has t erred to the facts and circumstances of the case and has also emphasized that the petitioners are Government Servants and that they are likely to lose their job. Be that as it may, the first and foremost point to be determined is, whether the petitioners, having served the. sentence of imprisonment,can be released on probation. Relevant part of section 360(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure lays down that when the court considers it expedient "that the offender should be released on probation of good conduct, the Court may, Instead of sentencing him at once to any imprisonment, direct that he be released on his entering into bond, with or without sureties, to appear and receive sentence when called upon during such period (not exceeding three years) the Court may direct and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. " Sub -section (8) of section360of the Code provides that if the Court is satisfied that the offender has failed to observe any of the conditions of his recognizance, it may issue a warrant, for his apprehension. Sub -section (9) of section 360 of the Code is in the following terms : - "An offender, when apprehended on any such warrant, shall be brought forthwith before the Court issuing the warrant, and such Court may either remand him to custody until the case is heard or admit him to -bail 'with a' sufficient surety conditioned on his appearing for sentence and such Court may, after hearing the case, pass sentence." The above -noted scheme of the law, as at present advised appears to show that the question of releasing a person, after the expiry of his sentence of imprisonment does not arise. Learned counsel for the petitioners, either on principle or authority, is ]unable to show anything to the contrary.