DILIP KUMAR MAHTO Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application is directed against the appellate order dated 24.6.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd, Bermo at Tenughat (Bokaro) in Cr. Appeal No. 23 of 2012 affirming the judgment/order dated 20.1.2012 passed by the learned Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat in G.R. No. 522 of 2003, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been convicted under Ss. 279, 337 and 304 -A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of three months each under Ss. 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas the learned court below sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for six months under Sec. 304 -A of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he confined this revision only on the point of sentence.

(2.) It is submitted that the petitioner has been convicted under Ss. 279, 337 and 304 -A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each under Ss. 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas the learned court below sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for six months under Sec. 304 -A of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the learned court below before sentencing the petitioner has not assigned any special reason for not giving the benefit to the petitioner under Sec. 360 of the Cr.P.C. and/or under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act. Accordingly, it is submitted that the order of sentence passed by the learned courts below is bad.

(3.) Learned Additional P.P. after going through the judgments of the courts below has not disputed the aforesaid submission.