STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. CHUTTAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal under Section 378 (i) (Hi) Cr. P. C. read with Section 11 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 has been filed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur camp Ganga-pur City dated November 29, 1979 in Sessions Case No, 36/79 (State vs. Chhut-tan & ors) by which even though the respondents were found to have committed offence under Section 399/402 I. P. C. but were given benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter called as the Act, 1958 ).

(2.) IT will suffice to state for the purposes of this appeal that on June 27, 1979 at about 10 p. m. a police party while on petrolling got information from an informer about the presence and preparation for decoity being made by the accused-respondents and three other miscreants who were said to be armed with guns, lathi beneath the culvert of Rivulet Kudana Nala. Thereupon, the police parly alongwith informer and two other respondents of village went in Jeep and encircled the Nala and saw five miscreants on one side and three on the other side while five respondents could be arrested, the other three were successful in making good their escape. Accused-respondents Chhuttan and Harbilas were each found in possession of a gun and bags having gun powder etc. The respondents were arrested and an FIR. to this effect got registered at the police station, Karauli, District Sawai-Madhopur and a case under Section 399/402 I. P. C. and 3/25 Arms Act was registered against them. After completion of investigation, challan was filed in the relevant Court and the accused respondents were committed to face trial in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur camp Gangapur City. The Accused-respondents denied the charge, and after examining evidence and hearing both the parties the trial court held respondents guilty of offence under Section 399/402 I. P. C Accused-respondent Harbilas and Chhuttan were further found to be guilty under Sec. 3/25 Arms Act, 1962. After hearing the arguments of both sides regarding punishment, the trial court accepted the plea of the respondents and instead of sentencing them, gave the respondents benefit of Section 4 of the Act, 1958 by the judgment under appeal.

(3.) IT is correct that the trial court came to the conclusion that the accused respondents were found guilty to have committed offence under Section 399/402 LP C. However, after hearing both the sides on point of punishment, the respondents were given benefit of provisions of Section 4 of the Act, 1958 and granted probation on furnishing bond in the sum of Rs. 3000/- and a surety ' in like amount by each of them. The trial court while granting probation also put three conditions on the respondents as under : - "1. . That the respondents shall appear in the Court whenever called upon within a period of 3 years to receive punishment; 2. That the respondents shall maintain good behaviour and peace; 3. That they shall not use any obstacle and they will also pay Rs. 50/-each as cost of prosecution. "