SOHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner in these two connected petitions, Criminal Revision Nos. 298 and 206 of 1988, does not challenge the conviction of the petitioner who is common to these petitions. It is claimed that the petitioner is a first offender. There is nothing on the record to suggest that he is not a first offender. The occurrence took place on January 28, 1983, which disclosed commission of two offences, one under the Opium Act and the other under the Arms Act. The opium was 2 kgs. and the arm recovered was .12 bore country made pistol and the live cartridge.

(2.) Having regard to the nature of the crime and its comparatively less magnitude, the request of the petitioner's learned counsel for leniency seems to be right. There is no point in sending the petitioner back to jail when six years of trial have already weighed on him. Accordingly, I release the petitioner in both cases on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, on his executing a bond before the trial Court in the sum of Rs. 3,000/- with one surety of the like amount for a period of one year, requiring him to keep the peace and be of good behaviour during the period of the bond. Let the bond be executed before the trial Magistrate within a period of one month from today. With these directions, these petitions are disposed of. Order accordingly.