SITA RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Also gone through the successive order. From the order dated 1,11,2002 it is apparent that this revision was admitted only on the question of sentence.

(2.) From the Judgment of the trial court it is evident that the petitioner was directed to undergo R.I. for six months under Sections 323, 447 of Indian Penal Code respectively for an occurrence having committed on 12.10.1986. The learned appellate court had concurred the view while dismissing the appeal.

(3.) It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from the Judgment impugned it is evident that on account of discrepancy persisting amongst the witnesses other accused was given benefit thereof by having their acquittal. It has also been submitted that petitioners have suffered a lot since 1986. Also submitted that there happens to be no justification in denying the privilege, so prescribed under Probation of Offenders Act whereupon the successive courts are completely silent. It has also been submitted that case and cross case have cropped up in the background of the land dispute and so, the petitioner deserves at least application of Probation of Offenders Act.