LAXMI NARAIN Vs. RAM CHANDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts leading to this revision petition are that the present petitioner Laxmi Narain had filed a complaint under sections 330 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the Code) against the present respondent and others in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani. The brief allegations, according to the complaint, were that on 3rd May, 1980 the co-accused of the present respondent Ram Chander, who at the time was posted as S.H.O., City Bhiwani, had arrested one lady and a man, in connection with smuggling of gold. The shop and the house of the complainant were also searched, but nothing incriminating was recovered. The complainant, was, however, arrested and brought to the Police Station, Bhiwani. There the respondent tortured him to extort money. After obtaining money, the respondent handed over the complainant to his co-accused who were Inspectors of Central Excise. The co-accused of the respondent took the complainant in a room of the Police Station and detained-him there and gave him beating.

(2.) AFTER recording preliminary evidence, the learned Magistrate summoned only the present respondent. His co-accused were not summoned as there was no sanction to prosecute them. After completion of the trial, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate convicted the respondent under section 330 and 323 of the Code and gave him benefit of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (for short the Act) and released him on probation for one year.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the learned trial Court should not have released the respondent on probation with out calling for the report of the probation Officer as sub-section (2) of section 4 of the Act is mandatory. He has cited Rattan Lal v. The State of Punjab, AIR 1965 SC 444. In that case sub-section (2) of section 6 of the Act had come for interpretation and it was remarked :-