STATE OF SIKKIM Vs. SASHIDHAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing these applications being I.A. No.10 of 2019 and I.A. No.12 of 2019, the Applicant/Respondent-Accused (hereinafter, the Respondent) prays that he be released on probation under Sections 4 and 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is submitted by Learned Senior Counsel that the Respondent is of good character and good conduct. Besides, he is aged about 60 years and retired as the Headmaster of a Government Primary School.

(2.) Objecting to the prayer of the Respondent, the Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the Respondent has made no grounds to establish that he satisfies the ingredients of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act inasmuch as the character of the offender has already been established by the conviction handed out to him in the Judgment of this Court dated 30-09-2019 in Crl.A. No.04 of 2016. Placing reliance on the decision of Ajahar Ali vs. State of West Bengal, (2013) 10 SCC 31 it was contended that the offence committed therein was one under Section 354 of the IPC, the Supreme Court held that it was a heinous crime and the modesty of the woman has to be strongly guarded and refused to grant the relief under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Ajay Tiwari vs. University of Delhi and Others, WP(C) No.1288 of 2012 of the Delhi High Court.

(3.) We have heard at length and considered the rival submissions of Learned Counsel for the parties.