RAM DAYAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 25-8-80 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge Bharatpur in Sessions case No. 60/80 whereby the appellant has been convicted & sentenced as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_78_LAWS(RAJ)11_1990.html</FRM> All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The appellant was acquitted under Sec. 382, IPC. Co-accused persons were acquitted of all the offences charged.

(2.) Shri Surana, learned counsel for the appellants, at the very outset, while not challenging the findings arrived at by the court below on merits, has not argued on the points urged in the memo of appeal except that of giving the benefit of probation to the appellant.

(3.) Shri Surana, in this regard submitted that the offence is said to have been committed in Dec., 1979; the appellant remained on bail throughout the period of trial and pendente appeal without misusing the concession of the bail, the appellant was young chap at the time of the alleged incident. Shri Surana further urged that the trial court did not assign special reasons for non-grant of benefit of probation to the appellant resulting in miscarriage of justice.